HE 



IMPvST PART 



OF THE 



AMERICAN SYSTEM 



OF 



GLISH SYNTAX, 



1 E W LOPING 



THE CONSTRUCTIVE PRINCIPLES 

;.-»-.^ Of THE 

GLISH LANGUAGE, OR PHRENOD. 

[ \ THREE PARTS. 



it niore ;mcuit 



to teach truth lhan error? and is it more useful to 



learn error than trw.. 



BY JAMES BROWN 

Exege* 5 of the Old System of English Grammar, of the 
i; Lue I » vstem, and of an English Sy.n as 0PE,calcu- 
Lllustrate i- Syntax Principles of the K ' J r anguage, 
i impress :!iem "on the memory !>v pi toi iai, an s< enical 
tonstration, thus enabliag the adult at ho, and th< 
child it school, to acquire, in a few months, a I r 
knowledge oi Syntax by the American >\ stej u 
chan tliej can ever acquire by the British 



bos t o N. 

184 1 . 



"7 




Rook .IB^to 






THE 

FIRST PART 

OF THE 

AMERICAN SYSTEM 

OF 

ENGLISH SYNTAX, 

DEVELOPING 

THE CONSTRUCTIVE PRINCIPLES 

OF THE 

ENGLISH LANGUAGE, OR PHRENOD. 

IN THREE PARTS. 



Is it more difficult to teach truth than error ? and is it more useful to 
learn error than truth ? 



BY JAMES BROWN, 

Author of the Exegesis of the Old System of English Grammar, of the 
Appeal from the Old System, and of an English Syntascope, calcu- 
lated to illustrate the Syntax Principles of the English Language, 
and to impress them on the memory by pictorial, and scenical 
demonstration, thus enabling the adult at home, and the 
child at school, to acquire, in a few months, a better 
knowledge of Syntax by the American system 
than they can ever acquire by the British. 



BOSTON 

1841. 



tt' 



V ...... ;^ « ^ » 






<A 



^* x 



Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1841, by 

JAMES BROWN, 
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. 

EXTRACT FROM THE COPYRIGHT LAW. 

y 7. J.nd £e it further enacted, That, if any person, or persons, 
after the recording the title of any print, cut, or engraving, map, 
chart, or musical composition, according to the provisions of this 
act, shall, within the term or terms limited by this act, engrave, 
etch, or work, sell, or copy, or cause to be engraved, etched, work- 
ed, or sold, or copied, either on the whole, or by varying, adding to, 
or diminishing the main design, with intent to evade the law, or shall 
print or import for sale, or cause to be printed or imported for sale, 
any such map, chart, musical composition, print, cut, or engraving, 
or any parts thereof, without the consent of the proprietor or pro- 
prietors of the copyright thereof, first obtained in writing, signed 
in the presence of two credible witnesses ; or, knowing the same to 
be so printed or imported without such consent, shall publish, sell, 
or expose to sale, or in any manner dispose of, any such map, chart, 
musical composition, engraving, cut, or print, without such consent, 
as aforesaid, then such offender or offenders shall forfeit the plate 
or plates on which such map, chart, musical composition, engrav- 
ing, cut, or print shall be copied, and also all and every sheet there- 
of so copied or printed, as aforesaid, to the proprietor or proprietors 
of the copyright thereof; and shall further forfeit one dollar for 
every sheet of such map, chart, musical composition, print, cut, or 
engraving, which may be found in his or their possession, printed 
or published, or exposed to sale, contrary to the true intent and 
meaning of this act ; the one moiety thereof to the proprietor or 
proprietors, and the other moiety to the use of the United States, to 
be recovered in any court having competent jurisdiction thereof. 



STEREOTYPED BY 

GEO. A. & J. CURTIS, 

NEW ENG-LAND TYPE AND STEREOTYPE FOUNDRY, BOSTON. 



(fl 






VICE PROVOST 

OF THE 

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. 

Sir: 

It is beyond doubt that Ekg-lish Grammar has been in an unset- 
tled state from its commencement to the present period. And. 
although it is not my design to enumerate the various injurious 
effects of this fugitive state of so important a branch of education. 
yet it may not be improper to remark that one of these results is 
the frequent change which teachers feel justified in making upon a 
mere possibility of procuring an improved Grammar. Our schools 
are almost quarterly disturbed by the introduction of a new system 
of prating about nouns and verbs. The people of our common coun- 
try have long felt the bad effects of this perpetuity in the change of 
a book which attempts the development of a popular science. Nor 
can they be ignorant of the fact that the unsoundness of the British 
system of English philology, is the primary cause of this alternate 
adoption and rejection which have for years distracted parents, chil- 
dren and teachers upon the subject of the true structure of their ver- 
nacular tongue. I have long been satisfied that nothing but a sove- 
reign remedy for the disease of this old British theory, can arrest 
the constant change which the numerous attempts to improve this 
system enable teachers to make ; and I have long been convinced 
that this remedy is a full removal of this British work of defect, 
error, absurdity and contradiction, from our schools, from our libra- 
ries, and from our affections, by a substitution of a system which 



iv DEDICATION. 

can be inducted into its place under the sanction of philological 
truth, and under the guardianship of one whose soundness of 
judgment, depth of erudition, and love of country, will induce the 
learned to examine, and others to confide. That pride of opinion, 
attachment of habit, and belief in the adequateness of the British 
system, will yield at once, is an event bordering too much upon a 
miracle, to be expected in these days. On the contrary, should these 
stern attributes not array themselves against this undertaking, 
their neutrality would commence a new epoch in human nature, 
and in human events. 

Nothing so effectually prevents improvement as a belief of pre- 
sent perfection. It is observed by Mr. Murray that little improve- 
ment in English Grammar can be expected at so late a period of 
the science. While, sir, I have ever felt perfectly willing that Mr. 
Murray should enjoy his own opinions on the subject of English 
phrenody, I have never been inclined so far to participate in his 
enjoyment as to subscribe to their doctrines. The court of chance, 
condition or fate, has decided that I should meet Mr. Murray in 
open combat, and withstand him page for page. Whether this ver- 
dict is to be viewed as the penalty of the crime of venturing to dif- 
fer in opinion from the distinguished champion of the British prin- 
ciples of English philology, or whether it should be considered an 
appointment to bring the enslaved child from literary bondage, 
must be solved by time itself, which leaves no blank in the history 
of man. Be that as it may, I have yielded to the mandate of this 
tribunal, from which, it seemed to me, no appeal would lie. I had 
commenced my exposition of the unsoundness of the British sys- 
tem, before the private virtues, public worth, and rare learning of 
Mr. Murray, were connected with the memory of the dead. His 
exit, like that of every great and good man, has hallowed the works 
of his hands — it has raised his erudition into a monument of fame, 
which will never crumble beneath the pen of the critic, nor suffer 
from the lapse of time. Nor shall my hand be raised to take one 



DEDICATION. V 

particle of granite from the imperishable pile. But while I wish 
this memento to the fame of a distinguished scholar to endure with 
out change, I rejoice in the rescue of that philological corpse which 
lay beneath the monumental mass of this great man's literary glory. 
Sir, do I seem affected ? It is natural that I should feel — the dead 
body which I have for years toiled to remove from beneath this 
tower, was a near and dear relative of my vernacular tongue ! Having 
at length made the rescue, I have presented, under your protection, 
the lifeless mass to my country for reaaimation ; — her touch can 
make the dead corpse live. And I entreat her not to withhold it — 
let him that is now dead, sit up, and begin to speak — let him teach 
the tender vines, which now hang in graceful festoons upon the 
branches of the tree of science, to wind their course up to its celes- 
tial summit. Yes, if into our republican Eden this tree has been 
transplanted, let us not slumber while banqueting upon the rich 
gums which exude from its trunk — rather let us beautify its boughs 
with American flowers, enrich the soil where it stands, and sweeten 
the fruit which it yields. 

May your life be as long as your feelings are generous j may 
your future days be as happy as your past ones have been useful ; 
and may your setting sun be as resplendent, and serene as your 
earthly career has been honorable and exemplary. 

THE AUTHOR. 
i* 



APPROVERS OF THE SYSTEM. 

Boston. 

Barnum Field, Grammar Master in the Franklin Public School. 

William D. Swan, Grammar Master in the Mayhew Public 
School. 

Frederick Crafts, Grammar Master in the Hawes Public School. 

Cornelias Walker, Grammar Master in the Wells Public School. 

Abner Forbes, Grammar Master in the Smith Public School. 

Joseph Hale Abbot, Principal of a Young Ladies' Seminary. 

William Russell. A. M., Editor of the American Journal of Edu- 
cation, (First Series.) 

T. Kidder, Principal of a Private School for preparing young 
gentlemen for business, or college. No. 36 Hancock Street. 

Philadelphia. 

Dr. S. B. Wylie, Professor of Languages in Pennsylvania Uni- 
versity. 

Rev. S. W. Crawford, Principal of the Academy connected with 
the University. 

John Sanderson. Professor of Languages in the Philadelphia High 
School. 

H. M'Murtrie, M. D.. Professor of Special Physics in the Phila- 
delphia High School. 

Professor Espy. 

C. J. Ingersoll, Roberts Vaux, Wm. Meredith, D. P. Brown, Dr. 
W. C. Brinckle, Dr. A. Comstock, Thomas A. Taylor, Mr. Slack, 
Mr. Goodfellow, David Maclure, Thomas M. Raser, E. Fouse, 
S. H. Wilson, Mr. Trego, Mr. Depuy, Mr. Ashton, Mr. Anderson. 

Pittsburgh. — R. N. Smith, John M'Nivins, Thomas H. Harris. 

Tlarrisburg. — John Maginnis. S. Douglass. A. T. Dean, A. L. 
Keagy, J. D. Rupp. 

New York. 

De Witt Clinton, E. Nott, President of Union College; Professor 
Yates, Union College; Rev. Samuel B. Blatchford, Rev. John 
Chester, Rev. C. G. Somers, Rev. D. H. Barnes, Rev. C. SchaefTer, 
Rev. Solomon Brown, Rev. D. Parker, C. M. Thayer, Charles 
Spaulding, L. S. Lownsbury. 

UHca. — Charles Bartlett, William Barbour, Euridge Whiflen, 
G. Comstock. Wm. Williams. L. Bayley, E. Ames, (teachers.) 



Vlll RECOMMENDATIONS. 

Ithaca. — Win. Irving, George C. Freer, M. Baird, G. D. Beers^ 
Isaac Day, A. G. Dunning, K. Hulin, Mr. Davis. 
Homer. — Samuel B. Woolworth. 
Cazenovia. — Daniel M'Ewen, Daniel E. Burhans. 

Maryland. 

Rev. John Findlay, James Gould, Mr. Stewart, S. Jones, Mr. 
Packard, J. Dyke, Mr. Mills, Wm. Wickes, E. Bennett, J. V. Berry, 
D. H. Bingham, David C. Rosco, C. Coleman, J. Brown. 

Mount St. Mary's Seminary. — Rev. James Lynch, J. Butler, John 
H. M'CarTery, James Cumy, Matthew Taylor, Barnard 0. Cava- 
nagh, John M'Clasky, Edward Sourin, Edward Collins, Thomas 
Butler, (all professors.) 

District of Columbia. 

Rev. Thomas Wheat, Benjamin Hallowell, John R. Pierpoint, 
Mr. Allison, C. K. Gardner. 

Kentucky. 
S. J. Anderson, James Holton, R. Fleming, James Fleming, 
B. F. Reeves. 

(See Recommendations at the close of the book.) 



An extract from the letter of Dr. Samuel B. Wylie, Vice Provost of 

the University of Pennsylvania. 

"Brown's system, duly appreciated, and adopted into our schools, 
will soon disenthral the grammar of our language from the shackles 
fastened upon it by the most celebrated grammarians, from the 
earliest period down to the present day. The crudities, inconsist- 
encies, and absurdities of the definitions, and views of Murray's 
system, whose empire for many years has been the most extensive, 
will, upon the perusal of Brown's exercises, appear obvious, and 
utterly indefensible. 

"In attending to the mechanism of the language, the student is 
insensibly introduced into the most interesting and useful parts of 
its philology ; and his intellectual powers become gradually devel- 
oped, stimulated, and delighted by the recognition of its philosophic 
principles. In short, Mr. Brown's system forms a new epoch in the 
history of English Syntax, as important in our language as the 
steamboat in our waters." 

H. Fuller, Esq. BosT<w > AuGUST 6 > 184 l • 

Dear Sir : — In September, 1839, in answer to the request of a 
friend, who inquired of me what I thought of Brown's American 
System of Grammar, I replied in the following words : "I have for 
many years been acquainted with this gentleman's profound inves- 



RECOMMENDATIONS. IX 

ligations into the very mysteries of our language ; and I am sure he 
has done more than any other man to lay open the absurdities and in- 
consistencies of Murray and his host of followers. But this is not all. 
He has built up a beautiful and luminous system of his own, founded, 
as I conceive, on true principles, simple in their nature, and coherent 
in all their parts ; and he has thus formed grammar into a science, 
which, from the logical connection of all its parts, teres et rotunda in 
se ipsa, will furnish hereafter to the student one of the finest and 
most healthful exercises of the human mind." To the teacher of 
youth especially, it cannot fail to be a highly interesting and valua- 
ble work, whether he may choose to adopt it entire into his school or 
not. 

" I have now taught the English grammar for thirty years, and I 
have read all the grammars of any note on the subject ; but I have 
found none, except the American System, by James Brown, which is 
not full of absurdities and contradictions. I feel a deep interest in 
the progress of a sound, rational and healthful education ; and if 
my voice could be heard through the whole length and breadth of 
our land, I would say to all teachers, examine the work carefully 
for yourselves." 

At the time of writing the above statement, I had not much expe- 
rience as to the comparative ease with which pupils can be made 
acquainted w T ith the two nomenclatures. Indeed, I was not then so 
fully impressed with the immeasurable superiority of the new nomen- 
clature as I am now . nor had I seen, by a trial, as I have lately seen, 
the most conclusive proof that children may be taught the new 
nomenclature in a much shorter time than they can the old. One 
reason of this is, the new nomenclature is not arbitrary, but founded 
in the nature of grammar itself. Mr. Brown has discovered the true 
relation of words to each other, and their power in forming sen- 
tences — relations and powers which in many particulars were not 
known before. He has founded his nomenclature on these powers 
and these relations, and it will be seen, by any one who will study 
the system, that the nomenclature contains the science. 
• When I first turned over the pages of Mr. Brown's grammar, 
and saw his new terms, it struck me that it would be impossible 
to introduce a system, however beautifully formed, while encum- 
bered with such a nomenclature ; and I strongly advised Mr, 
Brown to retain the old nomenclature. At this time I was not 
aware of the extreme beauty and simplicity of the new nomencla- 
ture, nor of the impossibility of using the old names to express the 
new principles on which the new system is founded. Besides, 
there are in Brown's grammar several new departments, of high 
importance, to which nothing corresponds in the old system, and for 
which new names are absolutely necessary. Now these few 
names are the foundation of the superstructure, and by a few suf- 
fixes and affixes to these elementary principles, the whole system 
successively rises to view, incorporated with its nomenclature, in 
splendid harmony and fair proportion. I still had some doubt 
whether children could be made to understand with comparative 
ease, and retain a nomenclature so refined in its principles and 
systematic in its arrangement. This doubt is entirely removed by 



X RECOMMENDATIONS. 

an experiment on children of eight and nine years of age. I was 
present six successive days, while Mr. Brown was teaching- these 
children the elementary principles of his grammar, employing his 
hieroglyphics and his new nomenclature. This experiment was en- 
tirely successful, and it will prove to any one who shall make him- 
self acquainted with the progress these children have made in this 
short period, that the system is eminently practical, and calculated in 
a high degree to strengthen the intellect, and improve the discrimi- 
nating powers of all who may devote their attention to it long 
enough to become well acquainted with the strictly logical manner 
in which all its parts are put together. 

In haste I subscribe myself 

Yours, very truly. 

JAMES P. ESPY. 

I have examined with considerable care Mr. James Brown's sys- 
tem of English Grammar. Its fundamental principles are entirely 
original, and appear to me not only to be in harmony with the true 
genius of the English language, but to be eminently fitted to inter- 
est and discipline the youthful mind. Many of these principles, 
as well as the numerous exercises founded on them, of great prac- 
tical value, have no counterpart in the old system. Its nomen- 
clature, so far as it is necessary for the pupil's use, is easy of acqui- 
sition ; and, superseding, as it does, the necessity of numerous 
abstract definitions, it must greatly facilitate his progress. By 
means of his new terms, Mr. Brown has supplied a kind of aid in 
the study of English Grammar, analogous to that which the chemi- 
cal nomenclature affords in the study of chemistry. 

' JOSEPH HALE ABBOT. 

Boston, November 1, 1841. 

The subscribers have attended a course of lectures, given by Mi'. 
James Brown, on his new theory of English Syntax. They feel 
confident that his system is clear and exact, suited both to the 
genius of the language, and the powers of the juvenile mind. 
The whole theory seems peculiarly valuable not only for its ten- 
dency to attract and secure the attention of the learner, and to keep 
his judgment in constant exercise, but for its adaptation, both in 
princivh and nomenclature, to the development of the true science 
of English Grammar. 

BARNUM FIELD, 
Grammar Master in the Franklin School. 

CORNELIUS WALKER, 
Grammar Master in the Wells School. 

FREDERIC CRAFTS, 
Grammar Master in the Hawes School. 

WILLIAM D. SWAN, 
Grammar Master in the Mayhew School. 

ABNER FORBES, 
Grammar Master in the Smith School. 

WILLIAM RUSSELL, 
Ed. Am. Jour. Education, (First Series.) 
Boston. Nov. 1. 1841. 



RECOMMENDATIONS. XI 

Franklin School, Boston. Oct. 2d, 1841. 
Rev. Otis A. Skinner : 

Dear Sir : — The undersigned, members of the highest division of 
the first class in the Franklin School, having attended, with much 
pleasure and advantage, for two months, on Mr. James Brown's 
instructions in " English Syntax," most respectfully request that we 
and our associates, may be allowed to pursue this most interesting 
study under our master. Be assured, kind sir, if we can be thus 
favored through your influence, we shall feel our many obligations 
greatly increased, and will endeavor to manifest our gratitude by 
our constant attention and application to all our studies, and by our 
unceasing exertions in every way, to advance the reputation of our 
highly favored school. 

We are yours, with much esteem. 

JOSEPH H. WHEELOCK. CAROLINE H. PITTS, 

BENJAMIN SMITH, MARY M. DINGLEY. 

JOHN A. LAMSON, Jr., SARAH A. CHEEVER, 

A. HAVEN. ESTHER M. SIMONDS, 

S. MILLARD, MARY F. BLODGET, 

S. H. CLAPP,' LUCY H. HOWE, 

SAMUEL L. WHEELER, SARAH E. MANSUR, 

JAMES B. PEARSON, HANNAH S. PARMELEE, 

CHARLES JOHNSON, MARY J. LEACH, 

H. H. COPELAND, L. S. E. FROTHINGHAM, 

F. E. ARCHIBALD, EMILY G. PRATT, 

JAMES PERKINS, MARY A. WHEELER, 

GEORGE H. CRAM, MARIA D. FAXON, 

ABBY K. SWEETSER. 

The following letter is from H. M'Murtrie, M. D., &c, Professor 
of Special Physics, Central High School. Philadelphia. 

Mr. James Brown : 

Sir : — The brevity of my answer to your note of the 30th ultimo, 
may be contrary to your expectations. But it does not require 
many words to say that your " System of English Syntax," is not 
only a good one, but the only good one which I have ever examined. 
Your premises are axioms; and your consequences strict induc- 
tions. 

That the introduction of your system will be attended with delay, 
admits of little doubt. But " truth is mighty and will prevail/' 
Not a physician in Europe, who was forty years of age when 
Hervey discovered the circulation of the blood, ever adopted his 
theory, though it was based upon demonstration. Now, no man 
has a doubt on the subject. Such may be the fate of your theory 
of English Syntax. 

H. M'MURTRIE. 

Philadelphia, June 3d, 1841. 
It may be considered superfluous for me to say anything in favor 
of a system of English Syntax, which has received the approbation 



Xll 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 



of some of the most learned and experienced literary men in our 
country ; but having had practical demonstration of its superiority 
to the old system of Murray and others, I feel constrained by a 
sense of justice to contribute my feeble aid to have it introduced 
I am persuaded that the new nomenclature is more readily un- 
derstood, more easily retained, and more brief than the old. 1 
know of no valid objection to the entire system. It is a system 
which induces a habit of thought and reflection, gives vigor to the 
intellectual faculties, aud brings the whole mind to bear upon the 
science of language, so that, without the labor of memorizing a sin- 
gle line, the pupil may be brought to comprehend the subject in a 
much less time than is required to go through the ordinary process, 
with the old system, and which after it is done, leaves the mind in 
a bewildered maze, liable to all the fluctuations, to which the old 
theory has subjected the language. The various parts of which 
it is composed are so beautifully arranged and illustrated, so scien- 
tifically developed and demonstrated, and so accurately determined, 
that the person who has properly applied himself to it, is perfectly 
satisfied that he has built upon an indestructible basis. 

I consider Syn-dei-col-ogy, the Third Part of this new theory, 
invaluable. It cannot fail, I think, to be properly appreciated by 
an intelligent community. 

I hope his system, entire, may be speedily adopted, that we may 
not be under the necessity of teaching error. 

J. L. RHEES, 
Principal of the Model Public School. 

Philadelphia, June, 14th, 1841. 
We the undersigned, pupils in the Model School, having been 
favored with an opportunity of receiving instruction from Mr. 
Brown in his S3^stem of English S}^ntax,feel confident that we have 
acquired more actual knowledge of the syntax of our language in 
the few lessons which we have received under him, than we had 
acquired by our long attention to the old system. We find no diffi- 
culty in understanding and remembering the new names, and 
would greatly prefer the method pursued by Mr. Brown to the dry. 
and difficult task of memorizing what we cannot understand, and 
to which we have had heretofore to submit. 



WILLIAM STEVENS, 
GEORGE B. KEEN, 
JOHN F. HANSELL. 
JOHN CRAWFORD, ' 
H. AGNEW, 
CHARLES B. KEEN, 
JOSEPH HOUGH, 
JOHN AGNEW, 
JOSEPH LUTZ, 
H. D. LADD, 
THOMAS \V. MARTIN, 
RICHARD PARKER, 



T. J. CLARK, 
W. P. HENRY, 
CHARLES P. KITE. 
ARTHUR E. MURPHY. 
JACOB J. UBER, 
JOHN M'QUILLEN, 
A. J. WHITE, 
JOHN C. SPRINGER, 
CHARLES W. OURT, 
HENRY M'KAY, 
A. B. STEEL. 



PREFACE. 



Even a superficial oUserver of human affairs must be satisfied 
that the ease, accuracy, despatch and safety with which the transac- 
tions of life are conducted, depend much upon the degree of skill 
which men possess in the use of language. Who has not found 
that many of the difficulties which distract society, by setting mem- 
ber against member, arise from a want of^that skill in language, 
which is necessary to define the conditions of those transactions 
that lie treasured up in words ? It becomes every man, and woman, 
therefore, to understand, critically, the language of their own 
country — and, as an incentive to that careful attention which is 
necessary to such an understanding, let each one reflect upon the 
advantages of being able to use this instrument with ease, pro- 
priety, and despatch. 

In the business of life, language is invaluable ; how important, 
then, is a correct knowledge of it. In social intercourse, language 
is dear to all ; how desirable, then, is that skill which enables one 
to' use it with all the ease with which he can move the fingers of 
his hands. In the higher walks of life, language holds an elevated 
rank ; how important, then, to the lady, and gentleman, is a refined 
acquaintance with it. And to parents, who should ever superintend 
the education of their children, a philosophic knowledge of language, 
is a blessing indeed. 

Nor is it of little importance to this nation, that her youth should 
be early and thoroughly instructed in the principles of the English 
tongue. Too little stress is laid upon the education of her children. 
Youth is the progressive state of both mind, and body; and, if 
either is neglected here, it never attains that height in excellence 
2 



XIV PREFACE. 

to which our species are capable of ascending. The proper nour- 
ishment for both, while in this state, is generous, and constant ac- 
tion j and, in exact proportion to the use of this, will be the strength 
of the body, and the capability of the soul. Children, as such, are 
passed by as of no real value to a nation : the fact that from these 
young saplings are soon to be selected the pillars of the country, is 
rarely considered in its proper light, even by the American commu- 
nity. 

Youth is the season designed by nature for the formation of the 
mind — the expansion of the soul. But man, mistaken man, has 
contradicted this, and thus brought himself to a state so feeble that 
he can hardly secure hj.s rights, or enjoy his freedom ! It is not 
pretended that American children are deprived of schools ; but it is 
verily believed that they nearly waste their precious childhood by 
a false system of teaching. Is it too late for reform ? If not. let it 
be commenced in the primary schools — let the language be under- 
stood by the teachers, and by them thoroughly taught to their pupils.- 
Let the institutions in which youth complete their education, give 
attention to their own tongue : too much time is devoted to other 
languages. American statesmen must be acquainted with their own 
language ; or this republic is of short duration. Even the constitution 
of the United States cannot be understood by two impartial states- 
men in the same way. 

To the man of circumscribed views, innovation seems to imply a 
contempt for all former systems, and a total want of respect for 
their authors. But he who has seen the clouds of literary night 
dissipate before the sun of improvement, the region of science grow 
lighter and lighter, and the horizon of truth extend from time to 
time, by repeated changes, will soon overcome his attachment to 
absurd forms, and gladly promote that species of innovation, which 
tends to build systems upon truth, and philosophy. 

The author of this work respects the various systems of English 
Grammar : he regards them as so many stepping-stones by which 



PREFACE. XV 

the science has been brought to its present height of excellence. 
He respects their authors as men, and especially, as the founders of 
so grand a commencement. He respects the memory of Mr. Mur- 
ray for the good he has done in the republic of letters. So far from 
holding his shade in contempt, or his work in derision, he would 
fire his system with the sparks struck from the collision of its con- 
flicting principles ; he would deposit its ashes in a golden urn, and 
preserve them as a memento of its worth. 

The American Grammar, he is not insensible will oppose the 
wisdom of the learned, and the practice of years. But it should be 
remembered that, systems, the growth of ages, have been overturned, 
and that principles, gray with centuries, have been found a delusive 
chimera. All that relates to man, is matter of progression j we see 
the commencement of Christianity in mere rituals, and symbols ; 
we find its perfection in Calvary's Crimsoned Top. 

Are you ready to reject this work because you have been brought 
up at the feet of Murray? remember him who was brought up at 
those of Gamaliel ; listen to he cry of the Christians, and be 
reminded of Paul's journey to Damascus: education had drawn a 
film over his eyes ; and a miracle was necessary to restore his sight. 

From the dictatorial attitude of the English literati, this produc- 
tion may seem an infringement on the rights which they have so 
long claimed ; and which this country has too long granted. It is 
remarked by European writers, that English literature should be a 
model for the literati in America, until this country produces a 
Newton, an Addison, &c. We confess a deep regard for the shades 
of these illustrious men : but we would sooner build sepulchres to 
England's ancient prophets, than believe in her living ones. Where 
can stronger claims be laid to philological legislation, than in a 
country distinguished for freedom and power of speech ? 

In the British system of Grammar, the sense is either lost by the 
use of improper terms, or enveloped in arbitrary rules, definitions, 
and exceptions. Indeed, the whole system resembles a machine 



XVI PREFACE. 

hastily contrived, possessing no grand movements ; too complicated, 
too feeble in most of its parts, and, in general, acting upon wrong 
principles. The author of this work, therefore, after mature exam- 
ination of the European, has ventured to introduce new materials, 
and new principles ; and, to complete the remedy, he has extended 
his system to the relation of one assemblage of words to another 
assemblage. This work, therefore, is not only made a means for 
teaching the mere childlike relation of one word to another word, but 
an instrument for presenting that manly, mental, subtle coincidence, 
vibrating between the relative groups of the words which compose 
the sentence. This part of the American System is called mono- 
logy, and treats of words in their collective action, their collective 
bearing, and in their collective import — and, while it may be clearly 
comprehended even by the minds of children, it is not unworthy 
the close attention of men, of scholars, of philosophers. Monology 
consists in dividing a sentence into portions, or groups, ascertain- 
ing their true constructive relation, learning their exact significant 
characters, and referring the inferior portions to their respective 
superiors. This exercise urges the pupil to trace out the precise 
connection of the monos, by following the filaments which produce 
it j and thus fits him to discern the exact meaning of any writer 
whose language he may read. It prepares the pupil to read with 
an understanding which renders study easy, delightful, and profit- 
able to him. Monology gives the pupil such a knowledge of 
language as qualifies him to acquire the other branches of educa- 
tion with an expedition, ease, and satisfaction, which render study 
advantageous, and pleasing. Made familiar with this process, the 
pupil's mind kindles into fervor ; and he pursues his study as much 
for the pleasure of the exercise as for the advantage of knowledge. 
And, whether his eye is turned to the sign of the type, or his ear 
directed to the language of the tongue, he seizes the period with 
animation, moves along the constructive fibres which extend from 
portion to portion, works his passage through the entire sentence. 



PREFACE. Xvii 

and comes out with everything which philosophy can glean or 
acuteness discern. 

The author of this work is far from desiring to exhibit a mere in- 
dependence of mind in the rejection of the British system of English 
Philology. Nor does he mention the excellence of the American 
Syntax to institute an invidious comparison between the two — he 
does it to prevent an identity with those essays which have appeared 
within a few years, under the pretensions of improving the method 
of presenting the erroneous principles upon which the system of 
Murray has been founded. It differs much from all others : 

The American Syntax is a laconic system of English Philology, 
founded upon principles entirely new, and highly important. It 
settles all points contested among teachers — resolves all the diffi- 
culties of the pupil, and relieves the mind of all its grammatical 
scruples. It sets aside all other systems — exposes their defects, 
demonstrates the little use of attending to them, and presents to the 
pupil, the unerring, and only way to the structure of the English 
language. It urges the youthful mind to invention, and thought j 
it undeceives the most accomplished Grammarian, and instructs the 
most prof ound Philologist : and it is, in a variety of ways, and cases, 
the clergyman's guide in scriptural exposition, the lawyer's inter- 
preter in juridical discussion, and the magistrate's confirmation in 
legal decision. 

Language is an emanation from G-od. It is the medium of com- 
munication from one finite mind to another, and a means of inter- 
course between man, and his Maker. In construction, it is inge- 
nious ; in purpose, noble ; and in application to thought, wonder- 
ful. As a gift, it claims our gratitude • as a science, it demands 
our highest attention ; and, as a means of mental intercourse, it 
excites our admiration, and astonishment. 

Language is the mind's hand ; and, like that of the body, is em- 
ployed by many who are ignorant of its beautiful symmetry. But 
they that use it without understanding its principles, lose as much 
2* 



XV111 PREFACE. 

as those who strengthen their bodies with food which they do not 
relish. In tracing this hand through all its changes, and modifica- 
tions, in understanding their causes, and effects, and in seeing it 
follow the discursive part of the mind, fasten upon its curiously 
formed notions, and reach them to others, we are led to look for its 
Origin, 

It has long been a contested point whether language is a divine 
revelation, or a human production. But, when we trace it from 
cause to effect, we see more than human agency. Man consists of 
two parts — a body, and a mind; this is journeying through life in 
that. Thus the mind becomes a passenger : the body his chariot ; 
ideas his baggage ; the earth his inn • hope his food ; and another 
world his destination. And such is the relation between the pas- 
sengers while on the way, that they are compelled to interchange 
their ideas. For this purpose, either God has furnished them with 
language, a ready means for this exchange, or the passengers 
themselves have made this medium. When we reflect upon 
the passenger's connection with his chariot j when we see him 
drawing to himself, through organic avenues, the various objects 
which constantly surround it, we feel that this work is above man ; 
but, when we behold him analyzing these objects, forming correct 
notions of their component parts, and, with vocal organs attached 
to his vehicle, converting the air into sounds for the communication 
of those notions, we are ready to exclaim — the Former of the pas- 
senger is the Author of his language ! 



ADVE RTISEMENT, 

This theory of English Syntax is a new science ; and, 
as there are no words already in use, expressive of the 
principles on which it is founded, the new nomenclature 
is the offspring of necessity. No wish to become unique, 
has led to the introduction of this novelty in technology. 
This theory not only takes a new view, but a deeper, and 
a broader range of the constructive principles of our 
phrenod than the old British system. And, to enable 
the student to follow this range of thought through all its 
novelty, depth and extent, he must be led by a full, de- 
scriptive nomenclature. Besides, as a large portion of 
this new theory has neither been published, nor known 
by the old school grammarians, all must admit the neces- 
sity of a new nomenclature for this portion : and, when it 
is considered that the new names which this accession to 
English grammar, demands, are just as applicable to that 
portion of the new theory, which is a substitute for the 
old system, as they are to that part which is an addition 
to the old, none will think it inexpedient to employ the 
new names in loth parts of the new system. In my Exe- 
gesis, I have attempted to demonstrate the utter inap- 
plicability of the old technology ; and, in this work, I have 
furnished remedial terms ; and, should the world think 
proper to apply them for the cure of those diseased ones 
which I have shown to be too feeble to bear their own 
weight, it is hoped that the cause of truth will have no 
reason to complain, and that the youth of our country 
will have much reason to rejoice. 

I have no wish, however, to discard at once the old 
names. I am inclined to the opinion that an immediate 
rejection of these technicals from their accustomed sphere 
of action in the expression of grammatic thought, would 
be attended with some inconvenience. My view of the 
subject is that, if the substitutes which I have provided, 



XX ADVERTISEMENT. 

are better than the old ones of which I have complained, 
they may be used in connection with the old, till the 
world shall have become familiar with them, and then 
take the place of which the old ones now have the sole 
occupancy. Hence I have so connected the old terms 
with the new, that the pupil taught by this theory, becomes 
familiar with the old names of the nine parts of speech. 

The introduction of new names is a work in which 
every generation has been engaged. Within a few years, 
chemistry has been greatly simplified, and beautified by a 
neio nomenclature. " Within fifty years," says Dr. Web- 
ster, " thousands of new words have been added to our 
language ; and a complete revolution has been effected in 
almost every physical science. 

" Terms in the arts and sciences — of these some thou- 
sands have been added to our language within the last 
fifty years, of which a small number only have found 
their way into any dictionary " " The exact number of 
these terms now introduced for the first time into a die- 
tionary, is not known." " It cannot, however, be much 
short of four thousand." "Among them are some of the 
most common words in the language, such as oxyd, muri- 
ate, sulphate, sulphuric, nitric, azote, phosphorus, plane- 
tarium, polarize, &c." " Since the time of Johnson, a 
complete revolution has taken place in almost every branch 
of physical science." " New departments have been cre- 
ated, new principles developed, new modes of classification 
and description adopted." — Advertisement to Dictionary. 



A BRIEF CONTRAST OF THE TWO SYSTEMS. 

1. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it is founded upon principles which belong to grammar, 
instead of, as is the old, upon principles which belong- to 
things, Or, in other words, 

The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it is founded upon syntax principles instead of diction- 
ary, or significant ones, as is the old. 

2. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as its definitions, and rules are true, and consistent, in- 
stead of, as are those of the old system, false, and con- 
flicting. 

3. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as its nomenclature is appropriate, laconic, and easy of 
comprehension, and of retention, instead of inappropriate, 
vague, prolix, and difficult of comprehension, and hard of 
retention, as is that of the old system. 

4. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it is a full expression of the entire grammar of the 
English language, and not a partial development of a 
mere part of the syntax of this language, as is the old 
system. 

5. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it may be acquired without the slavish task of memo- 
rizing. 

6. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it is taught through the medium of the eye. 

7. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as it may be acquired by adults without even the least aid 
from living teachers. 

8. The method of learning by the American System 
differs from that of learning by the old, inasmuch as it 
makes the pupil master of printed speech, which places 
him on all the roads to knowledge. 

Note. The practice of teaching, viva voce, or by lectures, may 
be carried too far ; for the habit of acquiring knowledge from the 
voice does not favor the cultivation of a skill to acquire it from 



XX11 A BRIEF CONTRAST OF THE TWO SYSTEMS. 

books. It is so very important that pupils should habituate them- 
selves to the acquiring of ideas from print, that the art of teaching 
properly, lies, in a great degree, in giving them command over 
printed speech. It is upon printed signs that they are to depend in 
the absence of living teachers. Memorizing lessons, and attending 
lectures, are, when carried as far as they are at the present day, 
pernicious to the cause of science, and unfavorable to the growth 
of the human mind. Make youth masters of printed speech, and 
yon put them on all the roads to knowledge. 

9. The American System differs from the old, inasmuch 
as no one can teach from it without understanding it ; for 
the act of teaching by it is not a process of mere memo- 
rizing from the book, and reciting to the teacher ! 

10. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as it throws nearly all the labor upon the student, 
by enabling him to understand the subject with very little 
aid from his teacher. 

11. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as it employs the perceptive powers instead of the 
mere memorizing faculty of the learner. 

12. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as it enables the pupil to parse all those construc- 
tions which are called by the old system, anomalous ! 

13. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as it begets a love for, instead of a dislike to, the 
study of grammar. 

14. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as its principles are made lasting from their con- 
nexion with, the judgment, and not transient from a mere 
connexion with the memory, as are those of the old 
system. 

15. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as the old employs ninety-three technical terms 
while the American employs but forty -four ! (See the 
Nomenclatural Concordance, in the Syntascope.) 

16. The American System differs from the old, inas- 
much as its technicals can be explained by the teacher, 
and understood by the pupil, while the old system's tech- 
nicals can neither be explained, nor understood, even by 
the most profound philologist. 



LESSON I. 

It is usual, though not natural, to place the interroga- 
tories after the text from which the pupil derives his an- 
swers. I have ventured to adopt the natural method. The 
pupil should first examine the questions which precede 
the text. This will inform him to what parts of the text 
he should give his close attention. 

Questions. — 1. What is the etymology of dei-cology ? 

2. What is the meaning of deikos ? 

3. What is the meaning of logos ? 

4. What is the meaning of ep-e-dei-cology ? 

5. Can you give the etymology, that is, the true origi- 
nal words, of phrenod ? 

6. What is the meaning of phrenod ? 

7. What is the meaning of phren, and of odos ? 

8. Will you give the etymology of phrenody ? 

9. What is the etymology of syntax ? 

10. What is the meaning of sun, and of tasso ? 

11. What is the meaning of syntax ? 

12. What is the etymology of monology ? 

13. What is the meaning of monos ? 

14. What is the meaning of monology ? 



Syntax signifies the putting of words into proper forms, 
nd into proper places. 



THE TEXT. 

REMARK. 

As nothing is better calculated to improve the mind in 
the science of speech than etymological analysis, I have 
made such a display of the original words from tuhich the 
technicals of this system have been derived, as will enable 
him to become familiar with the character of each new 
word from an examination of the Greek elements out of 
which it has been formed. 



24 EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 



EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED* 

Phren, . the mind, . . . phren- 
O-dos, . a medium, od. 

Phren-od 

signifies the highway over which mind travels to mind ; 
the medium through which mind is communicated to 
mind. — (Exegesis, p. 1, ch. L) 

Phren-od, the mind's communicating medium, phrenod- 
Y, . the science, or art of, - . . ¥- 

Phren-o-dy 

is the science of phrenods. — (Exegesis, .p. 1, ch. 1.) 

Ep-os, . a word, .... ep-e- 

Bei-hos, . to show, to signify, • . . dei-c- 

Logos, . doctrine, principle, . . ology. 

Ep-e-dei-cology 

is that part of phrenody, which respects the signification 
of words individually taken. — -(See Syn-dei-coho-gy, and 
Addiction.) 

Sun, . . together, .... syn- 
Tasso, . . to put in order, . . . tax. 

Syn-tax 

is that part of phrenody, which comprises the constructive 
principles of phrenods. 

Etymon, . a true original, . . . etymo- 
Logos, . word, ..... logy. 

Et-y-mol-o-gy 

signifies the true original word, or words from which an- 
other word is formed; as, verhum is the true original word 
of verb. 



LESSON II. 

Questions. — 1. What is the etymology, and meaning 
of gno-mod ? 

2. Give the etymology, and meaning of gno-me-ol- 

o-gy f 

3. Give the etymology, and meaning of cordiclion ? 

4. Of how many kinds of diction does this lesson 
speak ? 

5. How many cordictions are there ? 

6. What does ab mean ? What does con signify ? 
Ab, from, and con, together. 

7. What is a subflrmation ? 

8. What does sub mean ? Inferior in degree, less. 

9. Will you give the etymology, and meaning of den- 
drology ? 

10. What sentence is given in illustration of the den- 
drology of words ? that is, of the trunk, and branch 
relation of words ? 

1 1 . Which is the trunk assemblage ? 

12. Which is the trunk word in the trunk assemblage ? 

13. Repeat the branch words in the trunk assemblage. 

14. Give the etymology, and meaning of cratology. 

15. What is the meaning of morpheology ? 

16. What is the etymology of syncla-deology ? What 
is its meaning ? 

17. What is the etymology, and meaning of po-e- 
ol-o-gy ? 

18. What is the etymology, and meaning of syn-dei- 
cology ? — (See Ep-e-dei-cology, and Condiction.) 

THE TEXT. 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED. 

Gno-me, , a gnomod, a sentence, . . gnom- 
O-dos, . . a medium, a way, . . . od. 

Gno-mod 

signifies the means, the medium through which we express 
a cordictive thought. (See Cordiction, and Sentensic.) 
3 



26 EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED. 

Gno-me, . a gnomod, a sentence, . gnome- 

Lo-gos, . doctrine, principle, . . ology. 

Gno-me-ol-o-gy 

means the doctrine of a gnomod. (Syntascope, p. 216.) 
(Part I. p. 34.) 

Cor, . . the heart, .... cor- 
Dictio, . speech, . . . . diction. 

Cor-diction 

means that attribute of an assemblage of words, which 
renders it a gnomod, or sentence. (Exegesis, pp. 109, 
10, 11, and 12. Syntascope, pp. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 
16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.) 

DICTION. 

Diction is the expression of thoughts. 

There is a difference between the diction of words, and 
the signification of words. 

Dei-cology respects the mere power of a word to raise 
an idea in the mind ; but diction respects the exertion of 
that power in the act of raising an idea in the mind. For 
instance, a certain word has the significant power to raise 
a particular idea in the mind ; but then this power is not 
exerted in the raising of this idea, till the certain word 
which has this power, is written, or spoken. Let this 
be illustrated in the expression of some word which you 
have not in your mind at this moment : for instance, ear. 

This word had the power of raising in your mind, the 
idea of the organ of hearing, before you saw the word — 
but it did not exert this power till you saw the word. 
The power itself is called dei-cology ; but the exertion of 
the power is denominated diction. 

Diction is the expression of thoughts. Or, 
Diction is the expression of separate thoughts, and con- 
nected thoughts, and finally of information, intelligence. 

There are three kinds of diction ; namely, 

1. ./i&diction, 

2. Co/idiction, and 

3. Cordiction. 



EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 27 

1. -4£diction is that act of words, which presents 
thoughts as separate ; as pen, moon, ice, new, reads, walks, 
in, at, to. 

2. CoTidiction is that act of words, which presents 
thoughts as connected ; as new pen, in ice, moon light 
night, at church. 

The cor diction is the abstract affirmation, the abstract 
interrogation, the abstract command, the abstract petition, 
or the abstract subfirmation, expressed in the assemblage 
of words. 



It is nine. Affirmative 
Is it nine ? Interrogative 
Go thou. Imperative 
Forgive our sins, Petitionative 
when we repent. Subfirmative 



What is the difference between affirmation, and subfir- 
mation ? 

1. An affirmation is the highest degree of verbal 
assurance, which language can give ; as ; This tree is 
very high. 

2. A subfirmation is a less degree of verbal assurance 
than that which is given by affirmation ; as, If this tree 
is very high. (Part I. p. 37.) 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED. 

Mon-os, . alone, by itself, . . . mono- 
Logos, . doctrine, principles, . . logy. 

Mo-nol-o-gy 

respects the principles on which a sentence is divided into 
monos. 

A mono is any portion of a sentence, which can be 
taken by itself. (Part I. p. 45.) 

Dendros, . trunk with its branches, . dendro- 
Logos, . word, ..... logy- 

Den-drol-o-gy 

signifies the trunk, and the branch relation of words. 
This relation exists between two assemblages of words, 



28 EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 

as well as between two individual words ; as, [A cer- 
tain centurion's servant was sick] (unto death.) 

"A certain centurion's servant was sick" is the trunk of 
the sentence; and "unto death" is the branch. Again — 
A, certain, centurion's, was, and sick are branch words of 
the trunk assemblage ; and servant is the trunk word 
upon which these branch words depend. In the branch 
assemblage, unto death, unto is the branch, and death is 
the trunk word. 

Now, as dendros signifies the trunk with its branches, 
and the branches with their trunk, it is here employed to 
denote the trunk and branch relation of words. 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED. 

Cra-tos, . power, . . . crato- 

Lo-gos, . word, .... logy. 

Cra-tol-ogy 

respects the power of some words, and the want of it in 
others, to aid in producing a sentence. (Part II. p. 35. 
Syntascope, p. 118. Exegesis, p. 108.) 

The simple power, and the simple want of the power, to aid in 
the production of a cordiction, the true sentence characteristic, the 
real gnomodic trait by which a sentence can be distinguished from 
any insentensic assemblage of words, is called erotology. 

Poi-eo, . to make, form, create, . . poe- 
Lo-gos, . word, . ology. 

Po-e-ol-o-gy 

means the proper formation of words from sounds, and 
letters. 

Sem-ce-7ios, to designate, to distinguish, . semen- 
Lo-gos, . doctrine, principle, . . ology. 

Sem-e-nol-o-gy 

means the principles on which words designate those 
ideas to which the mere dictionary import conveys no 
allusion ; as, time, number, gender, &c. (Part II. p. 
55. Syntascope, pp. 139, 225.) 



EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 29 

ORIGINAL WORDS. MEANING. ANGLICISED. 

Sun, . with, or together, . . . syn- 

Kla-dos, . a branch, .... cla-de- 

Lo-gos, . doctrine, principle, . . . ology. 

Syn-cla-de-ol-o-gy 

means the principles of that classification of clades, which 
is founded upon their frame-work connection with other 
words. (Part II. p. 44. Syntascope, pp. 122, 124.) 

Mor-phe, . form, .... morphe- 
Lo-gos, . word, .... ology. 

Mor-phe-ol-o-gy 

respects the various forms into which words are put when 
applied to things, in the formation of sentences ; also the 
different forms into which sentences themselves are 
thrown by reason of the positions of their words, and 
monos. (Syntax, p. 177. Syntascope, p. 226.) 

A mono is that number of words which can be taken 
alone ; as, [John went] (into the field.) 

Sun, . . with, or together, . . . syn~ 
"Dei-hos, . to show, to signify, . . . dei-c- 
Lo-gos, . doctrine, principle, . . , ology. 

Syn-dei-col-o-gy 

respects the exact shades of thought which words express 
from being taken, not separately, but together. (See Con- 
diction.) 

" He lives by rule." The ep-e-dei-col-o-gy of the word, 
rule, and the syn-dei-col-o-gy of the mono, " by rule," are 
very different. The idea which " rule," when taken 
alone, raises in the mind, is that of a guide in action. 
But the idea which the mono, " by rule," raises in the 
mind, is that of conformity to. Hence the idea of con- 
formity to, is the result of taking the two words together. 
This idea of conformity to, is syn-dei-col-o-gy. 

3* 



A LANGUAGE, OR A PHRENOD. 

I. Every nation has found it important to have a phre- 
nod composed of sounds, and a phrenod composed of let- 
ters. Hence, each nation has two phrenods ; viz. a pho- 
nod, and an alphod. 

(Phone, a voice, and odos, a medium. Alpha, a letter, 
and odos, a means.) 

II. The distinctive name of a phrenod, is generally- 
formed from the national appellation of the people who 
use the phrenod. Hence, the French phrenod, the Greek 
phrenod, the English phrenod, &c. 

PHRENODY, OR PHILOLOGY. 

Phrenody is the science of phrenods. 

English phrenody is the science of the English phrenod. 

DIVISION OF PHRENODY. 

Phrenody is divided into two parts ; namely, 

1. Syntax, and 

2. Ep-e-dei-col-ogy. 

1. Syntax is that part of phrenody, which comprises 
the constructive principles of phrenods. 

2. Ep-e-dei-cology is that part of phrenody, which 
comprises the significant principles of individual words. 

(Ep-e-dei-cology is taught by a dictionary.) 

ENGLISH SYNTAX. 

English Syntax is that part of English phrenody, 
which consists of the constructive principles of the Eng- 
lish phrenod. (See Exegesis, pn. 15, 19, 29.) 



GNOMEOLOGY. 31 



1. Division of Syntax. 



English Syntax is divided into nine parts ; namely, 

1. Gno-me-ol-o-gy. 

2. Mo-nol-o-gy, 

3. Den-drol-o-gy. 



4. Cra-tol-o-gy, 

5. Syn-cla-de-ol-o-gy', 

6. Sem-e-nol-o-gy, 

7. mor-phe-ol-o-gy, 

8. Po-E-OL-0-GY. 



9. Syn-dei-col-o-gy. 

1. Gno-me-ol-o-gy, Mo-nol-o-gy, and Den-drol-o-gy be- 
long to Part I. 

2. Cra-tol-o-gy, Sem-e-nol-o-gy, Syn-cla-de-ol-o-gy, 
Mor-phe-ol-o-gy, and Po-e-ol-o-gy to Part II. 

3. And Syn-dei-col-o-gy, to Part III. 



LESSON III. 

Questions. — 1. In how many methods may the inves- 
tigation of a science be conducted? 

2. "What is the etymology of synthetic ? 

(It is from the Greek, sun, with, and tithemi, to put. 
The word means, then, to put parts together.) 

3. What is the etymology of analytic ? 

(It is from the Greek, ana, again, and luo, to melt, to 
dissolve. Analytic, then, respects the process of reducing 
a compound into its elements again.) 

4. At what part would the synthetic method of study- 
ing English Syntax, lead you to begin ? 

5. In studying this science analytically, at what part 
would you begin ? 

6. Is the process of forming letters into syllables ana- 
lytic, or synthetic ? 

7. In what state must words be in order to make them 
available in the communication of our ideas ? 

8. Why should the pupil begin his- study of language 
at the sentence, and not at the letters ? 



32 GN0ME0L0GY. 

9. What does the word, cordiction, mean ? 

10. What attributes are meant by the words, " distinc- 
tive attributes ? " 

11. Whence the propriety of calling these distinctive 
attributes cordictions ? 

12. What is the etymology of cordiction ? 

13. Can an assemblage of words be a sentence, which 
has not one of these vital properties ? 

14. Why not? 

15. What are the purposes which men have in forming 
sentences ? 

16. Is " unto the mount" a sentence ? 

17. Why not? 

18. Is " they went" a sentence ? 

19. Why? 

20. What is the cordiction of the following sentence : 
"Are they ill ? " 

21. What is a curious fact? 

22. It is a curious fact to find what ? 

23. We examine our dictionaries in vain to find what ? 

24. What are these five ideas which the dictionary im- 
port, the ep-e-dei-co-logical import of words, is unable 
even to touch ? 

25. What has every word which has an affirmative 
power, besides its affirmative power ? 

26. The dictionary does not define the word, wrote, and 
smote as meaning what ? 

27. Is the cordictive thought which renders an assem- 
blage of words a sentence, expressed by one word ? 

28. By what means is the cordiction expressed ? 

29. By what means is an affirmation, an interrogation, 
a subfirmation, a command, and a petition expressed ? 

30. What is the difference between an affirmation, and 
a subfirmation ? 

31. To affirm is what ? 

32. To subfirm is what ? 

33. From what is the word, affirmation, constructed ? 

34. Hence the sentence which is so, and so, does what ? 

35. From what is subfirmation made ? 

36. What is the cordiction which renders the following 
assemblage of words, a sentence : If it should be a fine 
day? 



GNOME OLOGY. 33 

37. The affirmations are what ? 

38. The subfirmations are what? 

39. The cordictive words in the affirmations, are what? 

40. And you see what ? 

41. And shall declares what ? 

42. What does does declare ? 

43. The thing to be made firm in the third gnomod, is 
what ? 

44. And you see what ? 

45. In the first sentence the thing to be rendered firm, 
is what ? 

46. The thing in the second gnomod, to be rendered 
firm, is what? 

47. And does declares what ? 

48. The thing to be made firm in the third gnomod, is 
what? 

49. How does is speak ? 

50. Let us now consider what ? 

51. In the first, the mind is to be rendered firm respect- 
ing what ? 

52. Look at what — and see what ? 

53. Is, then, speaks with what ? 

54. "With an assurance which is less than what ? 

56. If the assemblage of words, " if it is a fine day, 11 
is named in reference to what ? 

57. It must be called what ? 

58. " President is" is the cordictive portion of what ? 

59. And it is for you to ascertain what ? 

60. Does is say what ? 

61. Is what declared ? 

62. Having made these remarks it may be well to give 
what ? 

63. What is a subfirmation ? 

74. Have you examined with care the specimen of giv- 
ing the gnomeology of an assemblage of words ? 

75. Does the specimen begin with is, or with a ? 

N. B. The pupil should not be allowed to vary from 
the specimen, in the least thing. Nor should he have 
anything but his book in his hands while he is giving the 
gnomeology of the exercises which are under the speci- 
men. 



34 GNOMEOLOGY. 

THE TEXT. 

INTRODUCTION TO LESSON I. 

There are two methods in which the investigation of 
any science may be conducted, viz., the analytic, and the 
synthetic. The analytic traces the whole subject down 
into its elements ; but the synthetic traces all the elements 
up into the subject. In the development of grammar, we 
may take the synthetic, and trace letters into syllables, 
syllables into words, and words into sentences. Or we 
may take the analytic, and trace a sentence into words, 
words into syllables, and syllables into letters. But, as 
the formation of sentences is the ultimate object for which 
letters, syllables, and words are employed, it seems quite 
natural to commence the study of syntax at the sentence. 
Besides, as a sentence is the only state in which language 
can be employed as the medium through which our 
thoughts can be communicated to each other, the pupil 
should know what a sentence is, before he attempts to 
acquire a minute knowledge of the various elements of 
which it is composed. (See English Syntascope, pp. 8 
and 9.) The definitions which grammarians, both in 
America, and Great Britain, have given of a gnomod, or 
sentence, are unsound in the extreme. I have inserted 
many of these definitions in " The Exegesis," page 109, 
where I have attempted an exposition of their unsoundness. 



PART I. 

CHAPTER I. 

GNOMEOLOGY. 

Gnomeology is that part of syntax which consists of 
the doctrine of a gnomod, or sentence. (Syntascope, pages 
10, 216.) (See Exegesis, page 8. Examine from " All 
speech must be formed in the following manner. 11 ) 

The word doctrine, is made from doceo, to teach, to 
present; and signifies that thing, fact, or principle, which 



GN0ME0L0GY. 35 

is taught, or presented. The doctrine of the universe is 
the principles which the universe teaches, or presents to 
the mind. The doctrine of a passage of scripture is that 
principle which the passage teaches, or presents. Now 
there are various kinds of doctrines ; there are theological 
doctrines, metaphysical doctrines, syntax doctrines, &c. The 
principles which theology teaches, are theological doctrines; 
the principles which nature teaches, or presents, are met- 
aphysical doctrines, and the syntax principles which sen- 
tences present, are syntax doctrines. Now, what are the 
syntax principles which a sentence, properly so called, 
presents ? They are affirmations, interrogations, com- 
mands, petitions, and sub/irmations. These principles, 
these things, are not taught, not presented, by individual 
words — they are taught, presented, to the mind by assem- 
blages of words only. Nor is this all, for the assemblage 
which presents these things, comprises two words only. 
Gnomeology, the doctrine of gnomods, is presented by the 
joint action of two words ; as, JoJui went to church with 
Joseph. That which renders this assemblage of words 
a gnomod, or sentence, is the doctrine, the affirmation, 
which is presented in the assemblage, "John went." 
This affirmation, then, is called gno?neo\ogy. That is, the 
syntax doctrine which these two words by their joint con- 
tribution present to the mind of the reader. In this par- 
agraph, or period, there are two other assemblages of 
words, namely, " to church," and " with Joseph." 

These assemblages also present syntax doctrines. But, 
as the doctrines which these assemblages present do not 
render them gnomods, sentences, they (the doctrines) are 
not denominated cordictions. The syntax doctrines of 
assemblages of words, which do not render the assemblages 
gnomods, sentences, are called, not cordiction, but condi- 
tion. These doctrines are the theme of Syndp:icology, 
which is presented in Part III. 

A Gnomod, or Sentence. 

A gnomod, or sentence, is an assemblage of two or 
more words, which expresses a cordiction; as, 1. It is 
nine, 2. If it is nine, 3. Is it nine? 4. Go thou to 
school, 5. Forgive thou their sins. 



36 



GNOMEOLOGY. 



1. "What does the word, cor diction, mean? 

Affirmation, interrogation, command, petition, and sub- 
firmation. 

2. Whence the propriety of calling these distinctive attributes 
cor diction ? 

From the fact that these five attributes are the vital 
parts of speech, or diction. (Cor, the heart, and dictio, 
speech, diction ) 

3. Can an assemblage of words be a sentence, which has not 
one of these vital properties ? 

No. 

Why ? 

Because affirmation, interrogation, and subfirmation of 
something, or command, and petition to some being, are 
the only purposes which men have in forming sentences. 
The assemblage of words, therefore, which does not an- 
swer one of these purposes, is not a sentence. 

4. Is the following assemblage of words a sentence ? — "Unto the 
mount of Olives" 

No. 

Why not ? 

Because it has no cordiction. That is, it does not con- 
tain affirmation, interrogation, command, petition, or sub- 
firmation. 

5. Is the following assemblage a sentence ? — They went. 
Yes. 

Why? 

Because it contains a cordiction. 

What is the cordiction which it contains ? 

Affirmation. 

6. What is the cordiction of the following sentence ? — Are you 
well ? 

The cordiction, or heart of this assemblage of words, is 
interrogation. 

It is a curious fact, that words, by means of their dic- 
tionary significations, are competent to express all our 
ideas but five. Now these five ideas, which the diction- 
ary import of words is unable even to touch, are the Jive 
cordictions. And it is curious also to find that men have 



GNOME OLOGY. 37 

supplied this deficiency in individual function, by giving 
to a certain class of words, a collective power. This endow- 
ment consists in a capacity of an assemblage of certain 
words, to express an affirmation, an interrogation, a com- 
mand, a petition, and a subfirmation. We examine our 
dictionary in vain to find a word whose affirmative power 
is its dictionary signification. Every word which has an 
affirmative, or any other cor diet ice power, has also a dic- 
tionary signification ; as, " Moses smote the rock," " John 
wrote this letter." The dictionary does not define the 
words, smote and ivrote, as meaning an affirmation, but as 
denoting certain actions. Hence the affirmative idea 
which is expressed in the above instances, is the result of 
the extra significant capacity with which men have endued 
these, and similar assemblages of words, to enable them 
to express an affirmation, an interrogation, a command, a 
petition, and a subfirmation. 

What is the difference between affirmation and subfirmation ? 

1. An affirmation is the highest degree of verbal as- 
surance which language can give ; as, This tree is very 
high. 

2. A subfirmation is a less degree of verbal assurance 
than that which is given by affirmation ; as, If this tree is 
very high. 

To affirm is to give the highest degree of verbal assur- 
ance which language can give ; as, He returned ill. 

The word, affirmation, is constructed from the Latin, 
fir mo, to fix, tc establish, to make the mind firm with 
respect to the thing in question. Hence the sentence 
which is calculated to make the mind firm with regard to 
what it, the sentence, presents to the mind, is an affirma- 
tion, a formation ; as, It rains, The President is ill. 

To subfirm is to give a less degree of verbal assurance 
than is given by affirming ; as, If he returned ill, If it 
rains, If the President is ill. 

The word, subfirmation, is made from the Latin, sub, 
under, or inferior in degree, andfir?)io, to make firm, and 
means that action of the two cordictive words, which 
gives less verbal assurance than affirmation gives; as, 

1. If it is a fine day, we shall return. 
4 



38 GN0ME0L0GY. 

2. Joseph does not know whether the President is ill, 

3. It is said that the President is ill. 

I. The affirmations are, 

1. We shall return. 

2. Joseph does not know. 

3. It is said. 

II. The subfirmations are, 

1. If it is a fine day. 

2. Whether the President is ill. 

3. That the President is ill. 

The cordictive words in the affirmations, are, " we 
shall" " he does" and " it is." And you see that they act 
with such a degree of force, as gives the mind the highest 
degree of verbal assurance respecting the things in ques- 
tion. In the first sentence, the thing to be rendered firm, 
is our return; and shall declares that this shall take 
place. The thing in the second gnomod, to be rendered 
firm, is Joseph's want of knowledge respecting the illness: 
of the President ; and does declares this want of know- 
ledge to exist. 

The thing to be made firm in the third gnomod, is the 
fact that it is said that the President is 111. And is speaks 
with perfect assurance upon this point. 

Let us now consider the cordictive words in the sub- 
firmations. They are, "it is," " President is" and "Pres- 
ident is." 

In the first, the mind is to be rendered firm respecting 
a certain day's being a fine day. And does is declare 
that this certain day is a fine day ? Look at the full ex- 
pression, and see. It does not. Is, then, speaks with an 
assurance which is less than that given by affirmation. 
Hence, if the assemblage of words, "if it is a fine day" 
is named in reference to the degree of verbal assurance 
which it gives to the mind, it must be called a subfirmation. 

" President is" is the cordictive portion of the words , 
"whether the President is ill." And it is for you to as- 
certain whether this cordictive portion does, in fact, give 
a degree of verbal assurance respecting his being ill, less 
than that which is given by affirmation. Does is say that 



GNOMEOLOGY. 39 

the President is ill ? Is it declared that the President is 
ill ? Or is it merely declared that it is said that he is ill ? 

Having made these remarks, it may be well to give the 
following definition of a subfirmation : 

A Subfirmation is that establishing action of the cor- 
dictive words in a gnomod, which gives less verbal as- 
surance than is given by affirmation ; as, When the stage 
shall have arrived, we shall get some news. (" When the 
stage shall have arrived." ) 

SPECIMEN OF GIVING THE GNOMEOLOGY. 

" Of Olives" not a sentence, because it contains no cor- 
diction. 

" He is in Philadelphia" a sentence, because it contains 
a cordiction which is an affirmation. 

" Give us this day our daily bread" a sentence, because 
it contains a cordiction which is a petition. 



EXERCISES IN GNOMEOLOGY. 

1 . Law, in its most comprehensive sense, of action. 

2. Law, in its most confined sense, is a rule of human 
action. 

3. Man is a dependent being. 

4. On the laws of nature, and revelation, depend all 
human laws. 

5. The law of nations, is that collection of principles 
which regulates the intercourse between national com- 
munities. 

6. The work improperly. 

7. Is the work properly done ? 

8. If John returns to-day. 

9. Were any philosophers more eminent than Socrates 
and Plato ? 

10. Forgive our sins. 

11. Pardon our iniquities. 

12. The mind of man not without some food to nour- 
ish the activity of its thoughts. 

13. My good boy. 

14. Do come away, my child. (Petition.) 

15. Can the blind see ? (Affirmation.) 

16. " Have I not seen Jesus Christ, our Lord ? " 



40 MONOLOGY. 

17. " Doth God pervert judgment ?" 

18. " Doth the Almighty pervert justice ?" 

19. Can the flag grow without water ? {Affirmation.) 

{More exercises under pages 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62, 63, 
68, 69, 70.) 

In giving the gnomeology of the exercises under these 
pages, take each assemblage of words by itself. The fol- 
lowing is a specimen : (" There was a man) ( , , sent) 
(from God) -(whose name was John.") 

1. There was a man. a sentence, because it contains 
a cordiction which is an affirmation. 

2. Who ivas sent, a sentence, because it contains a cor- 
diction which is an affirmation. 

3. From God, not a sentence, because it contains no 
cordiction. 

4. Whose name was John, a sentence, because it con- 
tains a cordiction which is an affirmation. 



PART II. 

MONOLOGY. 

LESSON I. 



Questions. — 1, Can you give the etymology of mo- 
nology ? 

2. Into what are sentences divided ? 

3. Have you examined the specimen of monoizing, 
with care ? 

4. Have you examined the monoizing rules with great 
care ? 

5. Do you think that you can monoize exactly accord- 
ing to the specimen which you have examined ? 

6. What is a Mono ? 

7. In what way is a mono illustrated by the author ? 

8. Does the author say anything about the word, solo ? 

9. How many states have monos ? 



MONOLOGY. 41 

10. Can you give the meaning of ple-nary, imple-nary, 
broken, and unbroken ? 

11. By what examples does the author illustrate the 
plenary state of a mono ? 

12. By what example does he illustrate the implenary 
state ? 

13. What monos does he employ to illustrate the 
broken state, and what one to illustrate the unbroken 
state ? 

THE TEXT. 

ORIGINAL WORD. MEANING ANGLICISED. 

Monos, . alone, by itself, . . . mono. 

Mon-o 

signifies that which can be taken alone, the least whole 
which can be taken by itself. Thus, the head of a pin is 
a mono : the head is a part which has a full, distinctive 
character, and a distinctive name, independent of the 
stem. And the stem is a mono, because it also has a full, 
distinctive character when taken alone, by itself, apart 
from the head. Each nail on your fingers is a mono, 
because each has a full, distinctive character, when taken 
alone. {Monos, alone.) 

The word, solo, is applied to a tune, designed for one 
voice, or for one instrument, because this word is derived 
from the Latin, solus, which means alone. That is, the 
tune is called a solo because he that sings it is alone in 
the act. Now, as a tune is called a solo because he that 
sings it is alone in the act, so any part, or any assem- 
blage of the gnomod, or sentence, which can stand alone, 
or which can be taken alone, is called a mono. {Monos, 
alone.) 

A mono is the least whole which can be taken by itself 
alone ; as, {John,) [art thou well ?] — ( Syntascope, pp. 28, 
217.) 

All the words which hold an individual frame-work 
connection with each other, belong to the same mono. 

Letters in the formation of a word, are connected with 
each other individually ; as, bad. But when associated, 
4* 



42 MONOLOGY. 

they become words ; and as such, act upon other words 
in compact, as, bad man. The letters, b, a, d, in forming 
the word, bad, act and depend upon each other in an indi- 
vidual capacity. But when combined in the word, " bad? 
their individual action ceases entirely, for it is only their 
combined mass which acts in the assemblage. In forming 
words, the letters act individually upon each other, but in 
forming monos they act collectively. When letters act 
individually, they produce words ; but when they act col- 
lectively, they produce monos. Now, as the letters of 
different words, have no relation with each other as indi- 
viduals, so the words of different monos as individuals, 
have no relation with each other. But as the letters of 
different words, act collectively upon each other in forming 
a mono, so do the words of the same mono act in concert 
upon one another in forming a sentence. 

For instance : take the three following monos : [And 
he began to speak] (unto them) (by parables.) 

No single word in the last mono has any relation, as an 
individual, with any word as an individual, in the semi- 
mono, to speak. 

This will be seen by removing the mono between those 
under consideration. 

And he began (to speak) by parables unto them. 

Further : there is a trunk, and branch relation which 
words acquire, both as individuals, and as assemblages. 
This relation is produced by the trunk and branch bear- 
ing of words, both as monos, and as individual words. 

When one word is connected with another word, the 
relation is individual ; as, He went. 

But when one assemblage of words is connected with 
another assemblage, the relation is collective ; as, [He went] 
(to the house.) 

These two assemblages of words are connected, and 
this connection is a collective relation. Now as to the 
house is connected with He went, collectively, so is to con- 
nected with house individually. 

The relation between the two monos is collective. Col- 
lective, because the words, He went, together, or in con- 
cert, sustain the mono, to the house. But the relation 
between to, and house, is individual. 



MONOLOGY. 43 

The words, to, the, and house, bear a common, a col- 
lective relation to He went. 

Now was to individually connected with he, or with 
went, to would become a member of the mono, He went. 
But experiment will demonstrate, that to bears an indi- 
vidual relation neither to he, nor went : He to went — To 
went — To he ! 

It may be well to show that every assemblage of words 
will not hold & frame-work relation with the mono, He went. 

" He went," is all paper white ? 

In what way is the mono, is all paper ivhite, connected 
with the mono, He went ? 

There is no frame-work relation between these two 
monos, because there is no sense connection between them. 
Nor is there any constructive, syntax, individual relation 
between the words to and he — nor is there any individual 
relation between to and went. There exists a species of 
affinity among the individual words of the same mono, 
and among the monos of the same sentence. 

[" He went] (to the house.") 

To, the, and house form a new mono in the sentence 
because they hold an individual relation with each only. 
There can be no more words in the mono, to the house, 
because there are no more in the sentence, which have an 
individual relation with to, the, or house. Had the word, 
went, however, an i?idividual relation with to, the, or house, 
ivent would belong to the mono, to the house. 

A Mono. 

A mono is an assemblage of words which are individu- 
ally connected with each other ; as, 

[" A certain emperor] (of China) (on his accession) (to 
the throne) (of his ancestors) commanded a general release] 
(of all those,) (who were confined) (in prison) (for 
debt.") 

In this sentence there are nine monos ; and, of course, 
each is made up of words which hold an individual frame- 
work relation with each other. 

As a further illustration of this subject, we will fancy 
that the entire alphabet is a sentence, and that the follow- 



44 MONOLOGY. 

ing words are memos lying within this alphabetic sen- 
tence : 

1. Ramus, 

2. Kormos, 

3. Klados, 

4. Klonos, 

5. Syntax, 

6. Branch, 

7. Grammar. 

AbC DefohijklMnopqR Stu v-w xyz. 

Now, draw out the word, ramus, by touching, or speak- 
ing each letter which this word contains. Ramus. 

Draw out the other words in the same way. But per- 
haps it will be better to repeat the alphabetic sentence, and 
read the mono, ramus, once more, leaving the places which 
the letters in this mono now occupy in the alphabetic 
period, vacant. Thus : 

-bcDefahijkl-nopq t-vwxyz. 

ramus. 

Let us now draw out the monos which are contained 
in the following sentence : 

" Law, in its most comprehensive sense, is a rule of aC' 
tion." 

in its most comprehensive sense of action* 

Law is a rule of action. 

In its most comprehensive sense. 

Divided into monos in the following manner : 

[Law (in its most comprehensive sense) is a rule] (of 
action.) 

Is it asked why are there not more words in the mono, 
Law is a rule ? The answer may be given in the reply 
to the following question : 

Why are there not more letters included in the word 
Ramus, than R, a, m, u, and s ? 

Because R, a, m, u with s spell the entire word. And 
as R, a, m, u with s, spell the word, ramus, so do Law, is^ 
a with rule, spell the entire mono, " Lata is a rule. 11 

As a word is a family of letters, so a mono is a family 
of words. Hence, constructively, what a letter is to a word, 
a word is to a mono. A word is a frame-work of letters ; 



MONOLOGY. 45 

as, R-a-m-u-s : and a mono is a frame-work of words : as, 
[A Ramus is a branch] (of a tree.) 

MONOLOGY. 

Monology is the science of dividing a sentence into 
mo?ios. It is one of the principles of this science that in 
the process of breaking a gnomod down into monos, no 
regard should be paid to the position of the words. It is 
no matter how far the words of the same mono, are placed 
from each other by the intervention of other words : words 
belong to the same mono, not because of their local rela- 
tion, but because of their individual relation. Hence, 
whether the monos which constitute the sentence, [Law 
is a rule] (of action,) (in its most comprehensive sense,) are 
put together, are placed in an unbroken state, as, [Laio is 
a rule] (of action,) (in its most comprehensive sense,) or 
whether they are placed in a broken state, as, [Law (in 
its most comprehensive sense,) is a rule] (of action,) the 
words which hold an individual frame-work relation, be- 
long to the same mono. Therefore the words, Law, is, a 
and rule, belong to one mono, whether they are thrown 
from each other on the paper by the intervention of other 
words or not. 

As a village is divided into distinct families, so is a 
sentence divided into distinct monos. And, as each fam- 
ily is generally made up of those persons who have an 
individual kindred in pedigree, or in something else, so 
each mono is composed of those words which hold an 
individual relation in frame-work. It matters not, then, 
where a human being is, whether in a country far from 
the other members of his family, or by the very fire-side 
with them, the tie of individual kindredship binds him to 
this one group of human beings. So it is with words — 
for they are grouped into monos by their individual con- 
structive affinity, stand they where they may. Hence all 
the italic words in the following sentence, belong to the 
same mono : 

[The word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full] 
of truth, and grace. 

In the following, also : 

(" That , which we for our unworthiness, are 



46 MONOLOGY. 

afraid lo crave, our prayer is that, God would vouchsafe to 
grant) for the worthiness of his Son." 

(" God would vouchsafe to grant that favor .") 
That , which we, for our unworthiness, are 

afraid to crave, our prayer is that, God, for the worthiness 
of his Son, would vouchsafe to grant. (6 monos.) 

The words of a mono, then, have the same relation 
with each other, which the component parts of any other 
frame-work have to one another. Hence, the words of a 
mono, like the constituent parts of any other frame-work, 
are all relatives. The parts, or members of the same 
family, are relatives. The father, and son are relatives. 
The members of the same family are relatives upon the 
principle of consanguinity : they are of the same blood 
So, too, the parts of a tree are relatives, though not upon 
the principle of consanguinity. The parts of a tree are 
relatives upon the principle of construction. 

As a mono includes those words only, which have an 
individual syntax relation with each other, the ability to 
divide a sentence into monos, must be derived from a 
knowledge of this individual constructive relation. To 
enable the pupil to acquire this knowledge, I have pre- 
pared the following exercises in monoizing. In these, all 
the words which have the individual frame-work relation, 
have the same figure over them. 

11 1 112 2 2 

1. " The most powerful motives call for those efforts 

33 3 3 3 444 4 

which our common country demands of all her children." 

Now, the, most, powerful, motives, and call, have an 
individual frame-work connection; hence these words 
belong to the same mono. This mono, u The most powerful 
motives call" is a sort of chain, of which the, most, power- 
ful, motives, and call, are the links. These verbal links 
are individually connected ; hence they belong to the same 
chain. There are no more links in this chain, because 
there are no more which hold an individual frame-work 
connection with any link which now belongs to the chain. 



MONOLOGY. 47 

The pupil should now be thoroughly drilled in the fol- 
lowing way : 

111 11 

The most powerful motives call. 

Teacher. With what word does the hold a syntax 
connection ? 

Pupil. With most. 

Teacher. Does the make sense with most ? 

PupiL Why, the makes sense with motives. 

Teacher. How do you know ? 

Pupil. In conjecting the to motives, I find that the 
makes sense with motives. 

Teacher. What do you mean by conjecting words ? 

Pupil. I mean the reading of those two or those three 
words together, which have an individual frame-work 
relation ; as, The motives. 

Teacher. How do you conject most ? 

Pupil. Most powerful. 

Teacher. How do you conject powerful ? 

Pupil. Powerful motives. 

Teacher. Can you give the conjection of call ? 

Pupil. Motives call. 

Teacher. By what means do you ascertain the true 
conjective reading of a word ? 

Pupil. By the sense. 

Teacher. Is not the sense, then, the syntax, the gram- 
mar ? 

Pupil. O, no ! the sense is the means by which I as- 
certain the syntax, the connection ! The glass through 
which I see an object, is not the object itself. The con- 
nection is one thing ; the cause of that connection is 
another thing ; and the means by which that connection 
is ascertained, is still another ! 

Language is a frame-work whose constructive princi- 
ples arc not derived from the sense. Grammar is the 
mechanism of the language, not the sense which the 
words of a sentence denote. Hence, he who attempts to 
make a book to unfold the syntax, the mechanism of any 
language, should confine himself to constructive princi- 
ples. To say what a word in any sentence means, is to 
leave the frame-toork, the architecture of the house for 
its occupants. Bear this in mind : the grammarian is 



48 MONOLOGY. 

not to teach the nature of the liquid, but to illustrate the 
construction of the vessel ! In other words, it is not the 
province of the grammarian to describe the fruit, but to 
teach the frame-work of the basket which contains the 
fruit. 

22 2 

for those efforts. 

Teacher. What is the connective reading of for 1 
Pupil. For efforts. 

Teacher. Can you give the connective reading of 
those ? 

Pupil. Those efforts. 

3 3 3 3 3 

ivhich our common country demands. 

Teacher. Can you give the conjective reading of 
demands ? 

Pupil. Which country demands — Or, country de- 
mands which. 

Teacher. Well, as demands has an individual con- 
nection with which, which and demands belong to the 
same mono, do they not ? 

Pupil. They do. And I presume that country and 
demands belong to the same mono. 

Teacher. Why ? 

Pupil. Because demands and country have an indi- 
vidual connection. 

Teacher. Why do our and common belong to the 
same mono with country ? 

Pupil. Because our and common hold an individual 
frame- work relation with country. This may be seen by 
conjecting them to country : — Our country, Common 
country. 

4 4 4 4 

of all her children. 

Teacher. Do all these words belong to the same 
mono ? 

Pupil. They do : they all belong to the same mono, 
because they have an individual syntax relation with each 
other. 

Teacher. Can you conject of all, and her? 

Pupil. Of children, all children, her children. 



MONOLOGY. 49 

Directions. — In monoizing the following Exercises, the 
pupil should be guided by the specimen. He should apply 
the following principle in the same way in ivhich it is ap- 
plied in the specimen from which he should not be allowed 
to deviate in any respect. 

Principle. — All the words which have an individual 
syntax connection with each other, belong to the same 
mono. 

Note. — There is frequently a sense relation between 
two words between which there is no syntax, no frame- 
work, relation ; as, There was no white man there. 

In sense, no, is a negation upon white; yet, in frame- 
work, no is connected with man ; as, no man. 

SPECIMEN. 
11 12 2 2 

They were known on their return. 

1. They ivere known, — one mono. 

Principle. — All the words which have an individual 
syntax connection with each other, belong to the same 
mono. , 

2. On their return, — one mono. 

Principle. — All the words which have an individual 
syntax connection with each other, belong to the same 
mono. 

PREPARED EXERCISES IN MONOLOGY. 
1 11 2 2 2 

J. Charles saw hats, which he wanted. (2 monos.) 

1111 2 2 2 

2. John saw the teacher who taught me. (2 monos.) 

12 2 2 2 111 

3. " He that findeth his life shall lose it." (2 monos.) 

12 2 2 1 1 

4. " He that receiveth you, receiveth me." (2 monos.) 

1 1111 2 2 2 

5. That book is the one which I read. (2 monos.) 

I 1 2 2 2 111 

6. ■• The book which you see, is far off." (2 monos.) 

II 1111 12 2 

7. How often does one feel the pangs of sin. 

5 



50 MONOLOGY. 

11 2 2 2 2 2 11 1 

8. That thing which that man has said, is that thing 

3 3 3 3 3 3 

which that man should not repeat. 

11 2 2 2 111 

9. The ones which you have, will please me. 

Ill 1 2211 

10. " Then shall the kingdom of heaven, be likened 

3 3 3 4 4 4 4 

unto ten virgins which took their lamps." 

1112 2 2 2 3 

11. "On the margin of the Connecticut river which 

33444 5 5 5 5 5 

runs near to the college, stood many majestic forest trees 

6 6 6 7 7 7 7 

which were nourished by a rich soil." 

I 2 2 2 1113 3 3 

12. " When the bell rings, look , out for the cars." 

II 122 2 13 3 3 

13. " Look ye out for the cars when the bell rings." 

11 11111 

14. " Those, beautiful, young, fine, green, straight trees 

122 2 3 334444 4 

grew in that field which you see on the left hand side." 

Ill 23 3 3 2 

15. " An aged beggar who with trembling knees, stood 

44455 5 6 677 7 7 8 

at the gate of a portico from which he had been thrust by 

8 8 8 9 9 9 11 1 

the insolent domestic who guarded it, struck the prisoner's 

1 
attention." 

11 1 2 2 3 3 3 . 4 

16. "A certain emperor of China, on his accession to 

4 4 5 5 5 1 111 

the throne of his ancestors, commanded a general release 

6666 7 7 7 8 8 99 

of all those , who were confined in prison for debt." 

1111112 2 2 

17. " Sweet was the sound when oft, at evening's close, 

3 3 3 4 4 4 4 

Up yonder hill the village murmur rose." 



MONOLOGY. 51 

1 1 2 2 3 3 1 11 1 

18. " The relation of sleep to night appears to have been 

1 14 4 4 4 

expressly intended by our benevolent Creator." 

11122 233 3444 

19. An old clock that had stood for fifty years in a farm- 

4 5 5566677 7 

er's kitchen without the giving to its owner, of any cause 

8 8 19 9 9 9 1 10 

of complaint, early on one summer's morning, before the 

10 10 10 1 1 

family was stirring, suddenly stopped. 

112 2 2 11 1 

20. " The value of Christian faith may be estimated 

3 3 3 444 

from the consolations which it affords. 

1 11 12 2 2 3 3 

21. "Who would look back upon the history of the 

34445 5 16 6 6 

world with the eye of incredulity, after he having once 

6 6 7 7 7 8 8 

read it with the eye of faith ? " 

Now monoize the same exercises without the aid of 
figures 

SAME EXERCISES WITHOUT FIGURES. 

1. Charles saw hats, which he wanted. (2 monos.) 

2. John saw the teacher who taught me. (2 monos.) 

3. " He that findeth his life shall lose it." (2 monos.) 

4. " He that receive th you, receive th me." (2 monos.) 
o. That book is the one which I read. (2 monos.) 

6. The book which you see, is far off, (2 monos.) 

7. How often does one feel the pangs of sin. 

8. That thing which that man has said, is that thing 
which that man should not repeat. 

9. The ones which you have, will please me. 

10. " Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened 
unto ten virgins which took their lamps." 

11. "On the margin of the Connecticut river, which 
runs near to the college, stood many majestic forest trees 
which were nourished by a rich soil." 



52 MONOLOGY. 

12. " When the bell rings, look , out for the cars." 

13. " Look ye out for the cars when the bell rings." 

14. " Those beautiful, young, fine, green, straight trees 
grew in that field which you see on the left hand side." 

15. "An aged beggar who with trembling knees, stood 
at the gate of a portico from which he had been thrust by 
the insolent domestic who guarded it, struck the prisoner's 
attention." 

16. "A certain emperor of China, on his accession to 
the throne of his ancestors, commanded a general release 
of all those , who were confined in prison for debt." 

17. " Sweet was the sound when oft, at evening's close, 

Up yonder hill the village murmur rose." 

18. " The relation of sleep to night appears to have 
been expressly intended by our benevolent Creator." 

19. An old clock that had stood for fifty years in a 
farmer's kitchen without the giving to its owner, of any 
cause of complaint, early on one summer's morning, before 
the family was stirring, suddenly stopped. 

20. " The value of Christian faith may be estimated 
from the consolations which it affords. 

21. " Who would look back upon the history of the 
world with the eye of incredulity, after he having once 
read it with the eye of faith ? " 



LESSON V. 

THE DEM-MONO. 

Questions. — 1. What is the etymology of dem-i-mono? 

2. What is the meaning of dem-i ? 

3. What is the character of to in the dem-i-mono ? 

4. How is dem-i-mono pronounced ? 

5. What is a dem-i-mono ? 

6. In what does a dem-i-mono differ from an entire 
mono ? 

7. Why is to called a par-a-clade ? 



MONOLOGY. 53 

8. In what way can you ascertain that the assemblage 
of words of which to is the first, is the demi-mono ? 

9. For what purpose is to employed in the demi-mono ? 

THE TEXT. 

The word, dem-i-mono, is made from mono, that which 
is complete in itself, and dem-i, incomplete, not entire, 
half. 

A Dem-i-mono, 

is that assemblage of words, from which to excludes a 
foundation word, which renders the assemblage but par- 
tially complete in its frame-work, or construction ; as, 

1. To see the sun. 3. To laugh heartily. 

2. To walk. 4. To be punished. 

In order to complete the frame-work of each of the 
above instances, it is necessary to mention him who sees 
the sun, him who walks, and him who laughs, in the same 
assemblage in which these several acts are named. This, 
however, cannot be done ; the name of the agent cannot 
be put into the assemblage while to retains its place. We 
cannot say, to John laugh heartily. If we mention him 
who laughs, his name must be placed in another^ assem- 
blage of words; as, [John was heard] (to laugh heartily.) 

To is against the introduction of the agent's name. 
This may be seen from the omission of to : John laughs 
heartily. To is not only against the introduction of the 
agent's name ; but to is also against a command, and a 
petition. This may be seen from omitting to in the in- 
stances which follow : 

1. To see the sun. See the sun. 

2. To walk. Walk. 

3. To laugh heartily. Laugh heartily. 

4. To forgive our sins. Forgive our sins. 

To, then, is employed to prevent a command, and a 
petition, where gnomaclades, or verbs are used without any 
wish to command, or petition. As the character of to is 
that of against, I have denominated it the par-a-clade. 

5* 



54 MONOLOGY. 

Para, against, and clade, a word which is conjected to 
another word, as is a branch to the trunk. 

The first word in the demi-mono, is to, the clade which 
is against a command, against a petition, and against the 
mention of the agent's name in the assemblage of words 
in which his action is named. 

"Rule. Where unto cannot be substituted for to, the 
assemblage of which to is the first word, is a demi-mono ; 
as, to see the sun, John went to the city to see his friends, 
James is to be here soon. Now, as unto cannot be sub- 
stituted for to, except in the mono, to the city, it follows 
that the other assemblages of which to is the first word, 
are demi-monos. 

Select all the demi-monos from the following exercises : 

1. They intended to write two letters last week, 

2. We desired to find him at home. 

3. They intend to return soon. 

4. We hope to see all the family happy. 

5. He ought to return to see his friends. 

l l l 

6. I am to go to Boston soon to buy goods. 

7. He was seen to return on Saturday. 

l l 

8. They were told to get the horse to go to church. 



LESSON VI. 

1. Are there any words which cannot be conjected to 
an individual word ? 

2. To what can these words be conjected ? 

3. Can you repeat the words which are conjected to 
entire monos ? 

4. When is both conjected to a mono ? 

5. When is not only conjected to a mono ? 

6. When is neither conjected to a mono ? 

7. When is either conjected to a mono ? 

8. When is for conjected to a mono ? 



MONOLOGY. 55 

9. When is hoiuever connected to a mono ? 

10. When is otherwise conjected to a mono ? 

11. When is then conjected to a mono? 

12. When is thence conjected to a mono ? 

13. When is as-well-as conjected to a mono? 

14. Is as-much-as ever conjected to a mono ? 

15. Is and with though ever conjected to the same 
mono? 

16. Is and with 50 ever conjected to the same mono? 

17. Is and with yet ever conjected to the same mono ? 

18. When is since conjected to a mono ? 

19. Is even ever conjected to a mono ? 

Is ever with 50 ever conjected to the same mono ? 

20. Is and with therefore ever conjected to the same 
mono ? 

21. Is as with #Zso ever conjected to a mono ? 

22. Is but with though ever conjected to a mono ? 

1. How many of the words which may be conjected to 
a whole mono, may be conjected to a single word ? 

2. How many of those words which may be conjected 
to a mono, cannot be conjected to a single word? 

3. To what is as-well-as conjected when used in the 
sense of and ? 

4. To what is both conjected when followed by and ? 

5. To what is either conjected when followed by or ? 

6. To what is for conjected when it is used in the 
sense of because ? 

7. To what are hence, then y and thence conjected when 
they are used in the sense of therefore ? 

8. To what is not only conjected when followed by but ? 

9. When is now conjected to a mono ? 

10. To what is neither conjected, when followed by nor ? 

11. To what is otherwise conjected, when used in the 
sense of or ? 

12. To what is provided conjected, when it is used in 
the sense of if? 

13. To what is since conjected, when used much in 
the sense of because, or as ? 

14. When do the words which may be conjecled both 
to a word, and a mono, stand conjected to a mono ? 



56 



MONOLOGY. 



THE TEXT. 

The following words will not make sense with one word. 
Hence they are conjected to entire monos : 



And 

And therefore 

And yet* 

And though 

And 

Although 

And so* 

As* 

As also* 

As well as [and) 

Also* 

Again* 

Because 

Beside* 

Besides* 

Being* 

But* 

But though 

But although 

But however* 

Both* {and) 

Either* (or) 

Except* 

Excepting* 

Even* 

Even so 

Else 

For* (because) 



Further* 

Hence* (therefore) 

However* (but) 

Howsoever 

Howbeit 

If 

Inasmuch 

Lest 

Likewise* 

Moreover 

Nay* 

Nathless 

Not only* (but) 

Nevertheless 

Notwithstanding 

No* f 

Now* 

Neither* (?wr) 

Or 

Or even* 

Otherwise* (or) 

Provided* (if) 

Save* 

Since* (as) 

Than 

Then* (therefore) 

Thence* (therefore) 

Therefore 



N. B. Those words which have the * make sense 
with single words. 

1. The word, ripe, makes sense with one other word; 
as, ripe apple. 

The word, and, however, makes nonsense with one 
word ; as, and apple. 

Now, what kind of an apple is an and apple ? 



MONOLOGY. 57 

2. The word, therefore, makes no sense with a single 
word ; we do not say, therefore apples, therefore books, 
therefore men, therefore hats, &c. There is nothing- in 
apples, hooks, men, hats, &c, of which therefore is the 
sign, the name. 

Some of these words, however, make sense with a sin- 
gle word ; as, yet, so, as, also, again, beside, besides, being, 
but, however, both, either, except, excepting, even, for, 
further, hence, nay, not, only, no, now, neither, provided, 
save, since, then, and thence. 

Those words, then, which never make sense with an 
individual word, are, and, therefore, though, although, be- 
cause, else, howsoever, howbeit, if, inasmuch, lest, moreover, 
nathless, nevertheless, notwithstanding, or, nor, and than. 

In the first of the following sentences, yet is conjected to 
one word — in the second, to a whole mono : 

1. We are yet writing. 

ill l 

2. They have promised ; yet they do not perform. 

Yet belongs to a whole mono where it has the sense of 
but, nevertheless, notwithstanding. 

1. Those words which may make sense with a single 
word, or with a whole mono, stand conjected to monos, 
only where they introduce a mono containing a cordiction. 

2. The words in the above columns, which stand in 
this order, and although, and yet, but though, &c, may 
stand conjected to the same mono. 

3. When and can be substituted for as well as, as well as 

stands connected to a mono ; as, He was there 77 

i . i , i J as zvell as 

his brother , , . 

4. When both is followed by and, both stands conjected 
to a mono ; as, He was both virtuous, and brave. (Part 
II. p. 143.) 

5. When or follows either, or is conjected to a mono, 
as, Either he, or I must return. (Part II. p. 145.) 

6. When because can be substituted for for, for stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, Henry returned, for he desired 
to be at home. 

7. When hence is used in the sense of therefore, hence 
stands conjected to a mono ; as, He desired to be at home 
— hence he returned. (Part II. p. 147.) 



58 MONOLOGY. 

8. When however is used in the sense of but, it stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, He came to Boston; however he 
soon left. (Part II. p. 148.) 

9. When not only is followed by but, not-only stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, He is not only wise, but he is 
good. (Part II. p. 144.) 

10. When neither is followed by nor, it stands con- 
jected to a mono ; as, Neither he , , , nor I was 
severely hurt. (Part II. p. 151.) 

11. When otherwise is used in the sense of or, it stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, God gives men power to repent 
— otherwise the Bible is unsound. (Part II. p. 151.) 

12. When provided is used in the sense of if, it stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, I will be there provided I 
can , , . (Part II. p. 151.) 

13. When since is used in the sense of as, it stands 
conjected to a mono ; as, Since I cannot go I must stay. 
(Part II. p. 151.) 

14. When then is used in the sense of therefore, it 
stands conjected to a mono ; as, What, then, was to be 
done? (Part II. p. 153.) 

15. When thence is used in the sense of therefore, it 
stands conjected to a mono ; as, God requires all to do 
good — thence none should do ill. (Part II. p. 147.) 

16. When now is not used in the sense of at this time, 
it stands conjected to a mono ; as, "Now, how is any man 
to learn the will of his Maker, except from the Bible, and 
his conscience ? " (Part II. p. 150.) 



LESSON VII. 

1. How many states have monos ? 

2. What are the names of the states ? 

3. Can you explain the meaning of ple-na-ry, imple- 
nary, broken and unbroken as used in this theory ? 

4. Give the examples which illustrate these four states 
of monos in the text. 

5. Where is the implenary state most likely to occur ? 

6. Can you render the following monos plenary? 

1 12 2 11 

Give , , me a book. 



MONOLOGY. 59 

7. Are the following monos in a broken, or in an un- 
broken state ? 

1 12 2 1 1 

Give thou to James another apple. (2 monos.) 

THE TEXT. 

STATE OF MONOS. 

The states of a mono are 

1. Plenary, and 3. Broken, and 

2. Implenary, 4. Unbroken. 

1. The plenary state is that which arises from that 
degree of fulless, which admits of solution without sup- 
plying words ; as, [Give thou an apple] (to me.) 

2. The implenary state is that which arises from a 
want of one, or more words ; as, [Give , ( , me) an 
apple.] 

3. The broken state is that which arises from a division 
of one mono by the intervention of some other mono ; as, 
[Laiv (in its most general sense) is a rule] (of action.) 
[Law ( ) is a rule.] 

4. The unbroken state is that which arises from a con- 
tinuity of all the parts of a mono ; as, [Law is a rule] 
(of action.) 

The implenary state is most likely to happen in those 
monos which begin with the words that stand conjected 
to a mono. 

SPECIMEN OF MONOIZING. 
11 1 111 22222 

A certain man planted a vineyard, and , set a hedge 

334 4 44455 55 6 

about it, and , digged a place for the wine vat, and 

6 6 66 777778 8 9 

, built a tower, and , let it out to husbandmen, and 

9 9 10 10 10 10 

, -went into a far country. 

1. A certain man planted a vineyard, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

2. and he set a hedge, 
an implenary, unbroke?i mono. 



60 MONOLOGY. 

3. about it, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

4. and he digged a place, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

5. for the wine vat, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

6. and he built a tower, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

7. and he let it out, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

8. to husbandmen, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

9. and he went, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

10. into a far country, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

Scheme. 

In the following exercises the sentences are monoized, 
not by figures, but by [ ] and ( ). All the words "which 
fall within the [ ], belong to one mono; and all those 

l 
which fall within ( ), belong to one mono; as, [Law 

2 2 2 2 2 111 33 

(in its most general sense) is a ride] (of action.) 

1. Law is a rule, 
a plenary, broken mono. 

2. in its most general sense, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

3. of action, 

a plenary, unbroken mono. 

The implenary state is indicated by commas, and the 
number of words which is necessary to render it plenary, 
is indicated by the number of commas ; as, [ The poiver 
(of speech) is a faculty] ( , , peculiar) (to man.) 

which is peculiar, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

1. In monoizing, the pupil should render each imple- 
nary mono a plenary one. 



MONOLOGY. 61 

The pupil should be made to comprehend that the mono 
is taken as it is found on the paper, not as it is found in 
his mouth. 

Every mono is plenary in the mouth of him who mo- 
noizes properly. In some instances, however, entire 
monos are omitted, as 

" But they understood not what he said unto them." 
[But they understood not what , ] ( , , ) 

( , he said) (unto them.) 

1. But they understood not what things, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

2. they were, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

3. which he said, 
an implenary, unbroken mono. 

4. unto them, 
a plenary, unbroken mono. 

No part of the mono, " they were," is taken on the 
paper ; the mono is in the mouth, and as it is all uttered, 
its state is plenary. 

EXERCISES. 

Lesson X. serves as a Key to these exercises. 

1. [They have half] (of a dollar.) 

2. [The city (of Hudson) is not large.] 

3. [I am] (of opinion) (that he will come.) 

4. [He was refused] ( , admittance.) 

5. [A profile (of my friend,) is here.] 

6. [The room is full] (of smoke.) 

7. [The beauty (of that tree) is not great.] 

8. [He is void] (of sense.) 

9. [The boy is worthy] (of praise.) 

10. [He is destitute] (of money.) 

11. [The power (of speech) is a faculty] ( , , pe- 
culiar) (to man ;) (and , was bestowed) (on him) 
(by his beneficent Creator) (for the greatest , ;) 
(and , , , ) ( , , most excellent 
uses ;) (but (alas) how often do we pervert it) (to the 
worst , ) (of purposes.) 

6 



62 M0N0L0GY. 

12. [The rapid extension (of the Christian religion,) 
(through the principal nations) (of the world,) may be 
considered a direct proof ] (of the reality) (of the mira- 
cles) (of our Saviour;) (and , , , , , 

, , ) (of the miraculous powers) (with which) 

(the apostles ( , themselves) were endowed.) 

13. [The most powerful motives call] (on us) (for those 
efforts) (which our common country demands) (of all her 
children.) 

14. -[The e}^es (of a fool) are] (in the ends) (of the 
earth.) 

15. (In the beginning) [was the word ;] (and the word 
was) (with God;) (and the word was God.) 

18. [A certain man planted a vineyard,] (and , 

set a hedge) (about it,) (and , digged a place) (for 
the wine vat,) (and , built a tower,) (and , 

let it out) (to husbandmen,) (and , went) (into a 
far country.) 

17. [Nature has so exquisitely modelled the human 
features] ( , , , that) (they are capable) (of 
the expression) (of the most secret emotions) (of the 
soul.) 

18. [Now, when (he had ended all his sayings) (in the 
audience) (of the people,) he entered] (into Capernaum.) 

19. [And a certain Centurion's servant (who was dear) 
(unto him,) was sick,] (and , , ready to die.) 

20. (Verily, verily, [I say] (unto you) he (that entereth 
not) (by the door,) (into the sheepfold,) (but , 
climbeth up) ( , some other way,) ( , , 
the same , ,) is a thief,) (and , , a 
robber.) 

21. [Give , ( ," me) such , ] (as I purchased ;) 
(and , , as much , ) (as I purchased ;) and I 
shall be satisfied.) 

22. [Do , the job] (in such a manner) (as will please 
him ;) (and he will give ( , you) as many dollars) (as 
will pay you well) (for your trouble.) 

23. [Such , (as I have,) I will give] (unto thee.) 

24. [No such thing was ever declared] (as he seems to 
recollect.) 

25. ( , Much) (as man desires) [a little will 
answer.] 



M0N0L0GY. 63 

26. [As (Jesus passed by) he saw a man] (that was 
blind) (from his birth.) 

27. [As long (as I am) (in the world,) I am the light] 
of the world.) 

28. [He was good] (as well as , , rich.) 

29. [They came] (as pupils) (to my school.) 

30. [I must not use another's book when] (I have one) 
(of my own.) 

31. [They accommodate one another daily.] 

32. [Give , ( , James) another apple.] 

33. [The interest (of another , ) is not as dear] (to 
me) (as my own , , .) 

34. [I claim this one] (for my own , ) — (but another 
, claims it) (as another's , .) 

35. [This day suits my interest ;] (another , may 
suit another's , better) (than this ,,,,:.) 

36. [Any interest (except my own , ) is another's 

. •) 

1111 2 2 2 2 2 

37. [John has six books ;] (and his brother , seven 

2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 

, ;) (those , , ( , , added) (to 

5 5 3 3 3 

these , ) make thirteen , .) 

1 11 2 2 11 3 

38. [Nevertheless, I tell ( , you) the truth : (it 

33 44 3 55 5 

is expedient (for you) that) (1 go away.) 

1223 3 3 44 2 2 

39. [But (if I (with the finger) (of God) cast out 

2 111 1 5 5 11 6 

devils) no doubt the kingdom (of God) is come] (unto 

6 

you.) 

112 2 2 2 1 1 1 

40. [And he, (that had been dead,) came forth , 

33 3 44 455 

( , , bound) ( , , hand,) (and , 

5 5 5 G 6 6 7 

, forth , ) ( , , bound) ( , 

7 7 8 8 8 

, foot) (with grave-clothes.) 
In Lesson X. these monos are rendered plenary. 



PART III. 

DENDROLOGY. 

LESSON I. 

1. What is dendrology ? 

2. Into how many parts is dendrology divided ? 

3. What is Mono dendrology ? 

4. What is Ep-e dendrology ? (Ep-e, word.) 

5. How are monos divided in dendrology ? 

6. What is a pleocorm ? 

7. What does pleo mean ? 

8. What is the etymology of pleo ? 

9. What does clad mean ? 

10. What is the etymology of clad ? 

11. How many ranks have clads ? 

12. How many relations have clads ? 

13. When is a clad of the first rank? 

14. When is a clad of the plus relation ? 

15. Of what rank is the clad which is removed five 
constructive degrees from the pleocorm ? 

16. What is meant by " superior mono!" 

17. What is meant by " connective reading ? " 

18. Have you examined the specimens of dendrolo- 
gizing, with great care ? 

19. What is said of the rank of a clad which belongs 
to the pleocorm, and a clad ? 

20. Are rank, and relation confined to clads ? 

21. What is the meaning, and the etymology of corm? 

THE TEXT. 

1. Dendrology is made from dendros, a trunk with its 
branches, and from logos, a word, and means the trunk 
and branch relation of the monos of a sentence, and the 
trunk and branch relation of the words of a mono. 

2. Corm is derived of kormos, the trunk of the dendron 
or tree, and means the foundation mono of a sentence, 
and a foundation word of a mono. 

3. Clad is derived from klados, a branch of the dendron, 
or tree, and means a mono which bears a branch relation 
to another mono. 



DENDROLOGY. 65 

4. Pleocorm is derived from corm, foundation, basis, 
and pleonos, more than one, and means the foundation 
mono which must always comprise more than one word. 
(Pleo, more than one.) 

5. Corm, without pleo, signifies a foundation word in a 
mono. But corm with pleo, means the foundation mono 
of the sentence. 

6. Clade is derived from clad, and signifies a tvord 
which bears a branch relation to another word. 

1. Pleocorm, the foundation mono of the sentence; as, 
[The most powerful motives call] (on us) (for those efforts) 
(which our common country demands) (of all her chil- 
dren.) 

2. Cor me, a foundation word in the frame-work of a mono ; 
as. motives, in the pleocorme, us, efforts, lohich, country, 
and children, in the clad monos. 

3. Clad, a branch mono ; as, (on us) ( for those efforts) 
[which our common country demands) (of all her chil- 
dren.) 

4. Clade, a word which bears a branch relation to 
another word in the same mono ; as, the, most, powerful, 
and call, in the pleocorm ; and as, on in the first clad, for, 
and those in the second clad, our, common, and demands 
in the third clad, and of, and all, in the last. 

DIVISION OF DENDROLOGY. 

Dendrology is divided into mono dendrology, and ep-t 
dendrology.^ 

1. Mono Dendrology, 

respects the frame- work rank, and relation of monos. 

Order of Monos, 
Monos are divided into two orders upon the principle 
of their frame-work rank in a gnomod, or sentence. 
These are 1. Pleocorm, and 

2. Clad. 
1. The pleocorm is the foundational, the trunk, mono 
in a gnomod, or sentence ; as, [ There ivas a marriage] (in 
Cana) (of Galilee.) 

Note. — The pleocorm bears the same sustaining rela- 

* Ep-e. from epos, a word. 
6* 



66 DENDROLOGY. 

tion to the clad in the frame-work of a sentence, which 
the trunk bears to the branches in the frame-work of a 
tree. 

2. The clad is a branch mono ; as, [There was a mar- 
riage] (in Cana) (of Galilee.) 

Note. — The clads bear the same relation to the pleo- 
corm, in the frame-work of the sentence, which the 
branches bear to the trunk, in the frame- work of a tree. 

RULES. 

1, That mono which is so disposed of in the gnomodic 
frame-work as to become the foundation of the sentence, 
is the pleocorm ; as, [ There ivas a marriage~\ (in Cana) 
(of Galilee.) 

2. That mono which is so disposed of in the sentence, 
as to have a frame-work dependence upon another mono, 
is a clad ; as, [There was a marriage] (in Cana) (of 
Galilee.) (Ah,) (John,) have you come again ? 

REMARKS. 

The first rule is a sort of definition — it tells you that 
the pleocorm is the basis in the frame-work of a sentence ; 
as, \Jesus saw a man] (that was blind) (from his birth.) 
[" Jesus saw a man"] 

The second rule is also a sort of definition, for it 
informs you that a clad is a mono having a frame-work 
dependence upon another mono ; as, [Jesus saw a man] 
(who was blind) (from his birth.) 

>-n i ( ivho was blind, ) 
' [from his birth, i 

The first clad subjoins to the pleocorm the circumstance 
of the man's blindness. The second clad subjoins to the 
first clad, the circumstance of the time during which his 
blindness had continued; (who was blind) (from his 
birth.) 

Let me here put you somewhat on your guard respect- 
ing rules and definitions. You must understand them ; 
or you can derive no benefit from them. And to under- 
stand them, you must, in reading them, pause at each 
word in every mono, and at each mono in every sentence. 
Let me then call your attention to these rules again. 



DENDROLOGY. 67 

1. That mono which is so disposed of in the verbal 
frame-work as to become the foundation of the sentence, 
is the pleocorm ; as, Joseph ivent to the city ; James to the 
country. [Joseph went.'] 

2. That mono which is so disposed of in the sentence 
as to have a frame-work dependence upon another mono, 
is a clad; as, Joseph went [to the city;) {James went) (to 
the country.) 

You should give close attention to the phrase, " so dis- 
posed of." The pleocorm may, by a different disposition 
in the frame-work, become a clad ; and a clad may in the 
same way, become the pleocorm ; as, [James ivent] (to the 
city,) (Joseph , ) (to the country.) 

[I say the truth] (in Christ ;) (I lie not;) (my conscience 
also bearing ( , me) witness) (in the Holy Ghost.) 

[Hie not;] (I say the truth) (in Christ ;) (my conscience 
also bearing ( , me) witness) (in the Holy Ghost.) 

Few sentences, however, can undergo that revolution in 
their dendrology, in the manner of their frame-work, which 
is necessary to turn the pleocorm, into a clad, and a clad 
into the pleocorm, without a very obvious change in the 
sense itself. And when the change in structure gives a 
new sense, the old sentence is entirely lost in the new. 

In the following the pleocorm cannot become a mere 
clad: 

(" To him) (that worketh) [is the reicard not reckoned] 
(of grace,) (but , , , ) (of debt.") 



HOW THE PLEOCORM MAY BE DISTINGUISHED FROM THE 

CLADS. 

No sentence has more than one clad, of which potential 
precession can be predicated— and there are very many 
sentences in which no clad can occupy the first place ; as, 
But one thing is needful ; (and Mary hath chosen that 
good part) (which shall not be taken away) (from 
her.) 

As there is but one clad which can occupy the first 
place in any sentence ; and, as the pleocorm always can, 
it follows that the pleocorm is one of the two monos which 



68 



DENDROLOGY, 



can commence the sentence ; as, (In the beginning) [was 
the word;] and the word was with God, and the word was 
God. 

(In the beginning ,) and [was the zoord] are the only 
monos with which the verse can be commenced ; hence it 
follows that one of these is the pleocorm. 

SPECIMEN 

Of giving the Dendrology of Monos. 

1. Canst thou draw out Leviathan Avith a hook? 

Canst thozt draw out Leviathan, The pleocorm. Rule 
1. (Read the rule.) 

with a hook, a clad. Rule 2. 

2. Hearken , unto me, O, my people, (ye.) 
Hearken ye, the pleocorme. Rule 1. 

unto me, a clad. Rule 2. 

0. a clad. Rule 2. 

my people, a clad. Rule 2. 

EXERCISES. 

1. He was led up of the Spirit. (2 M.) 

2. And the house was filled with the odor of the oint- 
ment. (3 M.) 

3. And she wiped his feet with her hair. (2 M.) 

4. By grace are ye saved ( , , ) through faith. 

(4 M.) 

5. I can write better , with a pen than , 

, , , with a pencil. (4 M.) 

6. And they cried out with a loud voice. (2 M.) 

7. He lived in London , a year. (3 31.) 

8. On Friday last, we launched the ship. (2 M.) 

9. He went from his teachers to his books. (3 M.) 

10. He wrote these letters on last evening, in my pre- 
sence, on that table, with his pencil. (5 M.) 

N. B. Should more exercises be deemed necessary, they 
may be found under pp. 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62, 63, 68, 69, 

70, 82, 83, 84, 85. 



DENDROLOGY. 69 

SECOND SPECIMEN. 

["And when (much people were gathered together,) he 
spake] (unto them) (by parables.") 

1. "And he spake when" 
A plenary broken pleocorm, 

2. " much people toere gathered together" 
A plenary unbroken clad. 

3. "unto them" 
A plenary unbroken clad. 

4. " by parables" 
A plenary unbroken clad. 

PREPARED EXERCISES. 

Let the pupil supply every implied ivord as her eads his 
mono. 

The pleocorm is in [ ], the dads, in ( ). 

1. [There was a marriage] (in Cana) (of Galilee.) 

2. [He stands] (by the river.) 

3. [He lived] (in London) (during a year.) 

4. [He remained] (at home) ( , six years.) 

5. [He travelled] (in the United States) ( , 
three years.) 

6. [He returned] ( , last evening.) 

7. (On Friday last) [we launched the ship.] 

8. [He will be here] (within two days.) 

9. (On Saturday) [our church was dedicated.] 

10. [He studied] ( , sixteen hours) ( , a day.) 

11. [He wrought] ( , every minute) (of his time.) 

12. [He went] (from his teacher) (to his books.) 

13. [Will you give ( , me) your opinion] (of 
ihis affair.) 

14. [But every man hath his proper gift] (of God.) 

15. [But our sufficiency is] (of God,) 

16. [For whatsoever is more , cometh] (of evil.) 

17. [They came out] (of Egypt.) 

18. [They drank] (of the living rock.) 

(More exercises, pp. 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62, &c.) 



70 DENDROLOGY. 



I. RANK, AND RELATION OF CLADS. 

The rank of a clad respects its near, or remote connec- 
tion with the pleocorm. The ranks are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 

1. That clad which holds a direct connection with the 
pleocorm, is of the first rank ; as, [There was a marriage] 
{in Carta 1) (of Galilee.) 

2. That clad, which has a direct frame-work dependence 
upon a clad of the first rank, is of the second rank ; as, 
[There was a marriage] (in Cana) (2 of Galilee.) 

By conjecting these monos, it will be seen that " in 
Cana" has no direct dependence upon the pleocorm; as, 
there was a marriage of Galilee. 

II. RELATIONS OF THE CLADS. 

The relation of a clad respects the number of monos to 
which it stands conjected in construction. Clads have 
two relations, viz. JJni, and Plus. 

That clad which, in the frame-work of a sentence, de- 
pends upon only one other mono, is of the uni relation ; 
as, [John is the brother] (of James.) 

2. That clad which, in the frame-work of a sentence, 
depends upon more than one other mono, is of the plus 
relation ; as, [John is the brother] (of James ;) {but he is 
not the brother) (of Nathaniel.) 

REMARKS. 

The relations of clads are a very important part of the 
dendrology of monos. 

The author of this work has not unfrequently seen the 
best English scholars in our country, attempt in vain, to 
decide the relation of clads. Nor did these clads occur in 
complicated sentences. When I find a teacher, a lawyer, 
or a judge, who is unable to decide whether a clad is 
of the uni, ox phis relation, I think myself fully justified 
in drawing the conclusion that he would do much better 
in his profession had he a better knowledge of the struc- 
ture of sentences which are written in his own vernacular 
tongue. And let me here say to the pupil, that so long 



DENDROLOGY. 71 

as he finds it difficult to decide whether the relation of a 
clad is uni, or plus, there is still much for him to learn in 
the science of dendrology. 

To gi T :e the plus relation a full discussion, would require 
a volume. It depends upon so many nice shades of thought 
that the examples themselves would be appalling to the 
pupil. I shall give below a few instances of illustration, 
which will serve to throw the mind into a thoughtful pos- 
ture in relation to this interesting subject. And these, 
well apprehended, will do much to enable any one who 
wishes to become competent to decide of which relation 
any clad may be, to go far toward the gratification of his 
wish. 

In order to understand what follows on the subject of 
the relation of clads, it may be well to speak of the process 
of conjective reading. 

CONJECTIVE READING, 

Is the process of conjecting the inferior mono to its 
superior mono, or monos. 
- [There was a marriage] (in Cana) (of Galilee.) 

11 in Cana" a clad, uni relation, belonging to its superior 
mono. Conjective reading — There was a marriage in 
Cana. 

11 of Galilee" a clad, uni relation, belonging to its supe- 
rior mono. Conjective reading — (in Cana) (of Galilee.) 

The number of monos upon which a certain clad de- 
fiends, decides the relation of the clad. In the above in- 
stances, in Cana,h&s a dependent relation with the pleocorm 
only — in Cana, then, is uni relation. 

Of Galilee has a dependent relation with in Cana only. 
Hence of Galilee is of the uni relation. But did of Gali- 
lee hold a dependent relation with the pleocorm, and with 
the clad, in Cana, of Galilee would be of the plus relation. 
All, however, that is necessary to justify the introduction 
of of Galilee, is in Cana. (In Cana) (of Galilee) is per- 
fectly good in sense, and frame-work. Of Galilee does 
not stand conjected either in sense, or construction, with 
" There was a marriage." There was a marriage of 
Galilee, is not the sense which the sentence is intended to 
convey. 



72 DENDROLOGY. 

Again. What justifies the introduction of the clad, 
in Cana ? Could in Carta be used was it not for the 
support, the sense support, and the frame-work support, of 
" There was a marriage?" There was a marriage, then, 
is the superior mono of in Cana. " There was a mar- 
riage" is the trunk upon which in Cana depends for a 
frame-work support. And in Cana is the superior branch 
upon which of Galilee depends for a frame-work support. 

" John is the brother of James" 

Is it not obvious that of James depends upon John is 
the brother for a frame-work support ? Is it not obvious, 
too, that John is the brother yields, affords, this support 
to of James, just as the trunk sustains its branch? 

2. " John is the brother of James ; (but he is not the 
brother) of Nathaniel." Is it not here obvious that, " but 
he is not the brother ," is entirely dependent upon the two 
monos, [John is the brother] (of James,) for a frame-work, 
and a sense, support ? That " but he is not the brother" 
has a relation, a frame-ioork' connection, with " of Na- 
thaniel," is admitted. But the relation which " but he is 
not the brother" has to " of Nathaniel ," is quite different 
from that connection which it has with [ " John is the 
brother] (of James." ) In the one case the relation is a 
dependent connection ; or it is the connection of dependence 
— in the other it is the connection of sustaining. "But 
he is not the brother," is not introduced by " of Nathaniel" 
— but by [John is not the brother] (of James.) 

Again. It is not only important for you to see that, 
the clad, " but he is not the brother," not only does not 
depend upon the clad, " of Nathaniel," but to see also 
that it depends upon the two monos, ["John is the bro- 
ther] (of James.) Is it not obvious from an attempt at 
conjecting, " but he is not the brother" to either of the 
two monos, that "but he is not the brother " is not wholly 
supported by one ? 

[John is the brother,] but he is not the brother. 

This is not sense. Nor is the following any better : 

(Of James) but he is not the brother. 

The following, however, is sense, though it is not the 
full sense of the entire period : 

[" John is the brother] (of James ;) but he is not the 
brother. 



DENDROLOGY. 73 

Here the sense is perfectly clear, perfectly good, as far as 
the paragraph is continued. The mono, " of Nathaniel ," is 
wanted, not to render the sense of the other mono^ clear, 
sound and connected, but to complete the omitted thought 
which is subjoined to the connected thought of the other 
monos, ["John is the brother] [of James,) (but ke is not 
the brother — ) 

These monos stand well compacted together: nothing 
more is needed to produce any closer connection among 
them. True, these three monos do not express th >ohole 
sense, but they express that portion of it which they are 
intended to express, and that, too, in a perfectly clear and 
connected manner. 

12 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 

3. [" He (that makes his fire) (of hay) hath much 

1 4 4 4 4 4 

smoke,] (but he hath little heat.) 

The mono, but he hath little heat, is of the uni rela- 
tion. This may be seen from conjecting it to the 
pleocorm : 

[He hath little heat ;] (but he hath much smoke.) 

4. [He made his fire] (of hay;) (hence he had, little heat.) 
The conjective reading will show that the last mono is 

plus relation. 

[He made his fire] (hence he had little heat.) 
Now, the cause of his having but a little heat, was cer- 
tainly not that he made his fire : he had but a little heat 
because he made his fire of hay. The conjective reading, 
then, is, 

[He made his fire] (of hay ;) (hence he had little heat.) 

5. [He made his fire] (of hay) (hence he had much 
smoke.) 

The mono, hence he had much smoke, is of the plus 
relation. This mono is not sustained by the pleocorm 
alone : the conjecting of it with the pleocorm only, does 
not give the exact sense : 

[He made his fire ;] (hence he had much smoke.) 

The true conjection is this : 

[He made his fire] (of hay;) (hence he had much 
smoke.) 

It maybe thought, however, that the last mono expends 
7 



74 DENDROLOGY. 

entirely upon of hay. If this position is tenable, the 
mono is not of the plus, but uni relation : 

(Of hay) {hence he had much smoke.) 

But it was not the hay which produced the smoke : 
the making of the fire of hay produced it. The making 
of the fire did not produce the great amount of smoke ; 
nor did the hay produce it. But it was the making of 
the fire of hay which produced it. Hence it is obvious 
that the mono, " hence he had much smoke" is of the plus 
relation. 

6. [He directed the letter] (to John Foster ;) {therefore 
Jane Foster did not receive it.) 

What was it which prevented Jane Foster from re- 
ceiving the letter ? Was it John Foster ? No. Was 
it the directing of the letter, which prevented Jane from 
receiving it ? No. The directing of the letter to John 
Foster prevented Jane Foster's receiving it. The mono, 
then, " therefore Jane Foster did not receive it" is not 
justified by one mono ; hence it is not of the uni 
relation. 

7. [Henry came very fast,] {hence he soon arrived.) 
The mono, " hence he soon arrived" is of. the uni rela- 
tion. This mono cannot be of the plus relation, for there 
is but one other mono in the sentence. 

8. [Henry came] (with great speed,) {hence he sog?i 
arrived.) 

In this sentence there are three monos ; hence, if the 
construction will allow, the clad, hence he soon arrived, 
may be of the plus relation : 

1. [Henry came,] {hence he soon arrived.) 

2. [Henry came] (with great speed ;) {hence he soon 
arrived.) Surely of the plus. 

9. [I told the truth] {but he did not believe me.) Uni. 
10. [I told the truth] (in every particular;) {but he did 

not believe me.) 

It does not appear that in every particular, contributed 

to a want of faith ; hence the mono, but he did not believe 

me, is of the uni relation. 

[I told the truth ;] {but he did not believe me.) 

[The power (of speech) is a faculty] ( , , peculiar) 

(to man ;) (and , was bestowed) (on him) (by his be- 



DENDROLOGY. 75 

neficent Creator) (for the greatest , ;) (and , , , ) 
( , , most excellent uses ;) (but (alas) how often do 
we pervert it) (to the worst , ) (of purposes.) 

I shall give the dendrology of the monos of this sentence. In 
doing this ; I shall create occasions for comment on the relations. 

1. The poiver is a faculty, 
a plenary broken pleocorm. 

2. Of speech, 

a plenary unbroken clad, first rank, uni relation, belong- 
ing- to its superior mono. 

Conjective reading : [The power {of speech) is a 
faculty.] 

In general, all the superior mono should be read before 
the inferior one is introduced. In the above instance, 
however, this cannot be done without a change in the 
idea, the sense, of the writer. 

[The power is a faculty] {of speech.) 

But, although all the superior mono cannot be read 
before the inferior one is introduced, yet the portion which 
is omitted for the introduction of the inferior mono, should 
bo resumed, and read. Hence, " the power of speech" is 
not the conjective reading of the clad, of speech. The 
following is the true conjective reading : 

[The power {of speech) is a faculty.] 

REMARK. 

Within a few months I have taught several gentlemen, 
among whom I have found there have been some who 
seem to think it a drudgery to give the conjective read- 
ing entire. Some have contented themselves with simply 
saying, ' ; Belonging to its superior mono" the power. 

Others have condescended to conject the inferior mono 
with a mere part of the superior ; as, [" The power] {of 
speech") 

Now, the result of this defective method in giving the 
conjective reading, is that they who have pursued it, have 
not yet enabled themselves to give the dendrology of 
monos. The pupil, whether old or young, should give 
the conjective reading entire. Nor is this all ; for, in giv- 
ing the conjective reading, he should render each imple- 
nary mono plenary. 



76 DENDROLOGY. 

3. which is peculiar, 

an implenary unbroken clad; first rank, uni relation, 
belonging to its superior mono. Connective reading : 
[The power is a faculty] (which is peculiar.) 

4. to man, 

a plenary, unbroken clad ; second rank, uni relation, be- 
longing to its superior mono. Connective reading : 
[which is peculiar] (to man.^ 

5. and it was bestoived, 

an implenary unbroken clad, first rank, plus relation, 
belonging to its superior monos. Conjective reading : 
[The power (of speech,) is a faculty] (which is peculiar) 
(to man ;) (and it was bestoived.) 

1. The first thing to which your attention should be 
turned is the peculiarity in the rank of this clad. This 
mono is conjected to the pleocorm; hence it is of the 
first rank. This mono is also conjected to two clads of 
the first rank, viz., of speech, and tohich is peculiar. 
Hence this mono is of the second rank. Nor is this all; 
for this same mono is conjected to a clad of the second 
rank, viz., to man. In relatipn to the clad, to vian, this 
mono is of the third rank. The mono, then, " and it 
was bestowed" has three ranks. It derives the first from 
its connection with the pleocorm ; its second, from its 
connection with the two monos, of speech, and which is 
peculiar, and its third, from its connection with io man. 
To express all these ranks w^ould encumber the process of 
analyzing monos, without any good result equivalent to the 
embarrassment which it would produce. Where the 
mono, then, is of the plus relation, the pupil should not 
be required to express its different ranks. He should be 
required, however, to give one of its ranks. And, as the 
highest can generally be ascertained with greater ease 
than any other one, it seems expedient that he should 
express this rank, and omit the other, or others. 

2. The second thing to which your attention should be 
turned in the dendrology of the mono, " and it ivas be- 
stowed," is the relation. The relation of the mono, is 
plus. And that you may the better understand that the 
relation of it is plus, I shall direct your attention to the 
import of and. And signifies add, subjoin, what follows 



DENDROLOGY. 77 

to all, or to a mere part of what precedes ; as, John called 
me ; and I answered him. That is, add I answered him 
to John called me. 

I first affirm to the reader that John called me. I 
next require the reader to add, the fact that I answered 
him. But to what do I command the reader to add, to 
subjoin this fact ? There is no difficulty in answering- 
this question, for there is but one thing to which this fact 
can be added ; and the fact that u John called me" is that, 
thing. But did several things, several propositions, fall 
before and, the question might not be answered with so 
much ease. 

[John got the horn,] (and he called me ;) " and I an- 
swered Mm." 

To which fact is "J answered him" to be added? It 
is not the province of and to decide this point : this is 
under the control of the nature of the case. Let the 
point be decided by conjective reading : 

[John got the horn ;] (and I answered him.) 

It is obvious that " I ansivered him" is not to be added, 
subjoined, to the pleocorm. 

(and he called me ;) (and I answered him.) 
This is sense. 

[John got the horn ;] (and he called me,) (and I an- 
swered him.) 

To what is "he called me" to be added, to be subjoined ? 
The word, and, is the sign that this fact is to be added, 
subjoined*, to something ; and the nature of the case clearly 
indicates that it must be added to "John got his horn." 

The word, and, and the marks &, -J- mean much the 
same thing. [John called me] (& I ansivered him.) 
[John called me] (-j- I answered him.) 

6 -f- 9 are fifteen. 6 &; 9 are fifteen. 6 and 9 are 
fifteen. 

[The power (of speech) is a faculty] [which is peculiar) 
(to man ;) (and it was bestowed) (on him) (by his benefi- 
cent Creator) (for the greatest uses) (and it was bestowefr 
(for the most excellent uses ;) (but, (alas,) how often do 
we pervert it) (to the worst purpose) (of purposes.) 

1. [The power is a faculty] (-\-it was bestowed.) 
7^ 



78 DENDROLOGY. 

2. [The power {of speech) is a faculty] (-f- it was 
bestowed.) 

3. [The power (of speech) is a faculty] {which is pecu- 
liar;) (-f- it teas bestowed.) 

4. [The power {of speech) is a faculty] (which is pecu- 
liar) {to man) {-\- it was bestowed.) 

The fourth sentence gives the true conjective reading. 
The writer does not intend to add it ivas bestowed, to the 
power is a faculty only. The writer of the sentence 
first affirms that " The power of speech is a faculty tuhich 
is peculiar to man.'' 1 He then writes the mono, " U was 
bestowed." Before this mono he places the sign of addi- 
tion, and, -)-, &. This sign informs the reader that the 
assemblage of monos, {it was bestowed) {on him) {by his 
beneficent Creator ',) {for the greatest uses) is intended as 
additional matter. And the nature of the case indicates 
that this assemblage of four monos, is to be subjoined, or 
added, to the preceding assemblage which is also composed 
of four distinct monos. 

There is one mono, however, in the added assemblage 
of monos, to which and more particularly belongs than to 
the other three. This is, " it was bestoived" 

Without this mono, and could not be used — this may 
be seen from the following : 

The power of speech is a faculty which is peculiar to 
man, and { , , , ) on him by his beneficent 
Creator for the greatest uses. 

As there is one mono in the added assemblage with 
which and holds a direct syntax connection, so there is 
one mono in the assemblage to which the added assem- 
blage is subjoined, which alone makes it possible to sub- 
join the added assemblage. This mono is, " the power is 
a faculty." 

Without this mono, the assemblage, it was bestowed on 
him by his beneficent Creator for the greatest uses, could 
not be added to the assemblage, " of speech ichich is pecu- 
liar to man :" 

" Of speech which is peculiar to man" and it was be- 
stowed on him by his beneficent Creator for the greatest 
uses. 

The philosophy of this subject seems to be this : 



DENDROLOGY. 79 

When and is used between two assemblages of monos, 
not only one assemblage has a higher frame-work rank 
than the other, but there is one mono in each assemblage, 
which holds a higher rank than the other monos. The 
assemblage of monos, which holds the first rank is this : 

[The power {of speech) is a faculty] (ivhich is peculiar) 
(to man.) 

. 2. The assemblage of monos. which holds the inferior 
rank is this : 

(and it ivas bestowed) (on him) (by his beneficent Crea- 
tor) (for the greatest uses.) 

The mono which holds the highest rank in the assem- 
blage of monos of the first rank, is this : 

["The power is a faculty."] 

The mono which holds the highest rank in the inferior 
assemblage of monos, is this : 

("■It was bestowed") 

Now, the true syntax of and, extends no farther than to 
the mono, "it was bestowed," And the true syntax pro- 
vince of and, is to subjoin the highest mono in the inferior 
assemblage of monos, to the highest mono in the superior 
assemblage of monos. In the present instance, then, and 
subjoins its own mono to " the power is a faculty." This 
may be seen from the following conjective reading : 

[The poiver is a faculty;] {and it was bestowed.) 

Strictly speaking, then, the mono, "and it was bestowed," 
is of the uni relation. But, in a logical point of view. 
the entire superior assemblage of monos, may be taken as 
one proposition to which the entire inferior assemblage of 
monos, may be added, or subjoined by and. In this way 
the perceptive powers of the pupil are more liberally em- 
ployed than they are in deciding the relation of the inferior 
mono to which and belongs, by its mere syntax connection 
with its superior mono only. 

10. [John is the brother] (of James,) {and he is also my 
brother.) 



80 DENDROLOGY. 

Here trie true mere syntax relation of the last mono, is 
uni : 

[John is the brother,] (and he is also my brother.) 

This is obvious from the fact that the mono, " and he is 
also my brother" cannot be employed in this sentence 
without the mono, " John is the brother" This may be 
seen from the following conjective reading: 

(Of James) (and he is also my brother.) 

But it may be thought, because the sense is not fully 
carried out by the following conjective reading, that the 
mono, " and he is also my brother" is plus relation from 
its mere syntax connection in the sentence. 

[John is the brother,] (and he is also my brother,) 

In connecting the two monos which have a syntax con- 
nection, we do not undertake to express the entire sense 
of a sentence which has three monos. For instance : 

[" And (without him) was not anything made] (that was 
made") 

The following is the true syntax reading of the last 
mono : 

[And was not anything made] (that was made.) 

If the reader presumes that the entire sense of the above 
quotation, is to be expressed in the conjective reading of 
two of its monos, he must be quite wrong. Not only the 
entire sense of the whole quotation is not expressed by 
the syntax reading of the mono, " that was made" but the 
sense which is expressed in this syntax reading, is abso- 
lutely contrary to the sense of the entire quotation. 

[And was not anything made] (that was made.) 

That is, nothing which was actually made, was in fact 
made! Or, the very things which were made, were not 
made ! 

SPECIMEN IN THE DENDROLOGY OE MONOS. 

(" In the beginning) [was the word,] (and the word 
was) (with God;) (and the word was God.") 



DENDROLOGY. 81 

1. teas the word, 
A plenary unbroken pleocorm. 

2. in the beginning, 

A plenary unbroken clad, first rank, uni relation, be- 
longing to its superior mono. Conjective reading — [The 
word was] (in the beginning.) 

3. and the word was, 

A. plenary unbroken clad, first rank, plus relation, be- 
longing to its superior mono. Conjective reading — [The 
word was] (in the beginning ;) (and the word was.) 

4. ivith God, 

A plenary unbroken clad, second rank, uni relation, be- 
longing to its superior mono. Conjective reading — (and 
the word was) (ivith God.) 

5. and the word was God, 

A plenary unbroken clad, second rank, plus relation, be- 
longing to its superior mono. Conjective reading — (and 
the word was) (with God ;) (and the word was God.) 

SCHEME. 

1. In the following prepared exercises, every line con- 
stitutes a mono. 

2. The first line in every sentence is the pleocorm. 

3. The conjective reading is indicated by corresponding 
letters ; as, a a, which are placed at the close of the su- 
perior mono, and at the commencement of the inferior ; as, 

The word was a 
a in the beginning. 

Conjected thus : The word was a a in the beginning. 

4. The plus relation of a mono is indicated by placing 
the same letters before the inferior, which accompany its 
several superiors ; as, 

The word was a 
a in the beginning ; 
a a and the word was. 



82 



DENDROLOGY. 



Conjee ted thus : The word was a a in the beginning ; a a 
and the ivord was. 



PREPARED EXERCISES. 

1. The eyes a are fr* 
a of a fool 

b in the ends c 
c of the earth. 

2. The most powerful motives call a, b 

a on us 

b for those efforts c 

c which our common country demands d 

d of all her children. 

3. Nature has so exquisitely modelled the human fea- 
tures a 

a , , , that b 

b they are capable c 

c of the expression d 

d of the most secret emotions e 

e of the soul. 

4. The rapid extension a ) b may be considered a direct 
proof d 

a of the Christian religion 
b through the principal nations c 
c of the world, 
d of the reality e 
e of the miracles f 
/of our Savior, 

d d and ,,,-,/,,, g 

g of the miraculous powers h 
i with which i 
h the apostles were endowed, i 

1. [The power* is a faculty] 6 : d 

2. a (of speech) 

* The inferior mono should be introduced where the conjective 
letter stands in the superior. 



DENDROLOGY. 83 

3. &(which is peculiar) 

4. c (to man;) 

5. d > a > c (and it was bestowed)^/ g* ^> * 

6. e(on him) 

7. /(by his beneficent Creator,) 

8. #(for the greatest uses;) 

9. ^/<r(and it was bestowed) * 

10. *(for the most excellent uses;)i 

11. *i(but^ how often do we pervert it)* 

12. Ar(alas) 

13. *(to the worst purpose) 711 

14. w (of purposes.) 

1. [The rapid extensions & is a direct proof ]<*> S 

2. «(of the Christian religion) 

3. ^(through the principal nations) 

4. c (of the world) 

5. d(of the reality) 

6. °(of the miracles)/ 

7. /(of our Savior;) 

8. £*> a (and it is a direct proof ) h 

9. A (of the miraculous powers) 1 ' 

10. i(with which) 

11. *(the apostles^ were endowed) J 

12. *(of themselves.) 

1. [The most powerful motives call] a > b 

2. a (on us) 

3. &(for those efforts) 

4. °( which our common country demands)^ 

5. rf (of all her children.) 



84 DENDROLOGY. 

1. [A certain man planted a vineyard] a >/ 

2. a(and he set a hedge) b > c 

3. &(about it;) 

4. c > & (and he digged a place)^ e 

5. rf (for the wine vat ;) 

6. c > ^(and he built a tower ;)/ 

7. /(and fo? let it out)5"i* 

8. £"(to husbandmen;) 

9. ^g"(and he went)* 
10. *(into a far country.) 

1. [Nature has so exquisitely modelled 
the human features] a 

2. a (the consequence is that) & 

3. &(they are capable) c 

4. c (of the expression)^ 

5. d (o£ the most secret emotions) 6 

6. e (of the soul.) 

1. [Now, he entered when] a > d 

2. a (he had ended all his sayings)^ 

3. 6 (in the audience) 

4. c (of the people,) 

5. ^(into Capernaum.) 

1. [A certain Centurion's servant was sick] a > c 

2. a (who was dear) & 

3. 6 (unto him ;) 

4. c (and he was ready to die.) ) 
(To die, is a demi-mono.) 

1. [I say ,]<*>& 

2. a (verily verily he is a thief) c > hJ 






DENDROLOGY. 85 



3. 


^(unto you), 


4. 


c (that entereth not)<*> *>/ 


5. 


<*(by the door,) 5" 


6. 


e (into the sheep-fold ;) 


7. 


/> £"(but that climbeth up)^ 


8. 


h(by some other way) 


9. 


t(wko is the same person) 


10. 


i(and Ae is a robber.) 



(For more exercises in the dendrology of monos, take 
pages 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62, 63, 68, 69, 70.) 



LESSON V. 

1 . What is the etymology of syn-clad-ol-o-gy ? 

2. What is the meaning of this word ? 

3. How are clads divided under syn-clad-ology ? 

4. What is a pleocorm clad ? 

5. What is the etymology of clono ? 

6. What is the meaning of clono ? 

7. Does clonos mean a branch of the trunk, or a branch 
of a branch ? 

8. What do you say a pleocorm clad is ? 

9. What is a clono clad ? 

10. Can you give the clad which the author employs to 
illustrate the pleocorm clad ? 

11. And what clad is given in exemplification of the 
clono clad ? 

12. Have you paid close attention to the specimen in 
syn-clad-ol-o-gy ? 

13. Do you think that you can give the syn-clad-ology 
of the clads in the following sentence ? 

[The sun shines] (upon all men) (who will receive his 
rays) (which he sends) (from the heavens.) 

14. What an ambi clad ? 

8 



96 



SYNCLADOLOGY. 



THE TEXT. 



The word, syn-clad-ol-o-gy, is made from syn, with, or 
connected with, clad, a branch mono, and logos, doctrine, 
principle. 

Syn-clad-ol-o-gy 
is the principle of classing, and naming, the dads after 
those monos on which they have a constructive dependence. 

The principle of naming clads after those monos upon 
which they constructively depend, is the common pedigree 
principle of naming children. The child is named after 
some one with whom he is connected ; for instance, a 
child is called Joseph, because he stands connected by 
uncleship to a man of this name. 

But syn-clad-ol-o-gy is not only the common principle of 
naming children, but it is the common principle of naming 
things. A band is called a hat band, from its connection 
with a hat ; a noAl is called a thumb nail, from its con- 
nection with the thumb ; a nail is called a finger nail 
from its connection with the finger ; a string is called a 
shoe string, from its connection with a shoe ; a pipe is 
called a stove pipe from its connection with a stove ; a 
cushion is called a pin cushion, from its connection with 
pins ; a pie is called an apple pie, from its connection 
with apples. 

Sy?i, connected with, clad, a branch mono which is 
conjected to some superior mono, and logos, principle. 

Division of clads. 

Clads are divided upon the principle of their syntax 
connection with the pleocorm, with clads, and with both 
the pleocorm and clads. All clads stand conjected to the 
pleocorm, to clads, or to both : hence they are divided into 

1. Pleocorm clads, 

2. Clono clads, and 

3. Ambi clads. 

1. Clono, from clonos, a branch of a branch, a branch which 
grows upon another branch. 

2. Ambi, both. That is, both pleocorm, and clono at the same 
time. 

1. A pleocorm clad is one which has a direct depend- 
ence upon the pleocorm; as, there was a marriage {in 
Cana) (of Galilee,) " in Cana" 



SYNCLADOLOGY. 87 

2. A clono clad is one which has a syntax dependence 
upon another clad only ; as, (in Cana) (of Galilee.) 

3. An ambi clad is one which from its dependence 
upon the pleocorm, and a clad, becomes both a pleocorm 
clad, and a clono clad; as, [He went] (to the wrong place ;) 
(therefore he did not see his friend.) 

SPECIMEN 

Of giving the syn-clad-ol~o-gy of dads. 

[The sun shines] (upon all men) (who will receive his 
rays) (which he sends) (from the heavens.) 

In this branch nothing is done with the pleocorm : dads, and clads 
only, fall under the head of syn-clad-ol-o-gy. 

2. Upon all men, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm clad, belonging to the pleo- 
corm. Conjective reading : [The sun shines] (upon all 
men.) 

3. ivho will receive his rays, 

a plenary, unbroken clono clad, belonging to its superior 
clad. Conjective reading : (Upon all men) (who will 
receive his rays.) 

4. ivhich he sends, 

a plenary, unbroken clono clad, belonging to its superior 
clad. Conjective reading : (who will receive his rays) 
(which he sends.) 

5. from the heavens, 

a plenary, unbroken clono clad, belonging to its superior 
clad. Conjective reading : (which he sends) (from the 
heavens.) 

1. [John wrote a letter] (on last evening) (on that 
table) (with this pen) (to his brother) (who lives) (in 
Boston.) 

2. on last evening, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm clad, belonging to the pleo- 
corm. Conjective reading : [John wrote a letter] (on last 
evening.) 

3. on that table, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm clad, belonging to the pleo- 



88 SYNCLADOLOGY. 

corm. Conjective reading : [John wrote a letter] (on that 
table.) 

4. with this pen, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm clad, belonging to the pleo- 
corm. Conjective reading : [John wrote a letter] (with 
this pen.) 

5. to his brother, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm clad, belonging to the 
pleocorm. Conjective reading : [John wrote a letter] (to 
his brother.) 

6. who lives, 

a plenary, unbroken clono clad, belonging to its superior 
clad. Conjective reading : (to his brother) (who lives.) 

7. in Boston, 

a plenary, unbroken clono clad, belonging to its superior 
clad. Conjective reading : (who lives) (in Boston.) 

REMARKS. 

The above specimen is the pattern which the pupil 
should imitate exactly, in giving the syncladology of clads. 
There may be some teachers who will object to a part of 
the above form, upon the ground of tautology. They 
may say that " belonging to the pleocorm" renders the 
conjective reading redundant, and that " pleocorci clad " 
renders " belonging to the pleocorm" tautological. No- 
thing is tautological, that is useful. The giving of the 
usual form will not only render a new form unnecessary, 
but will serve to establish that which is already partially 
acquired. The trouble of learning new forms is very 
considerable ; hence where the common form can be used, 
it should be employed. Pupils should not be permitted to 
analyze clads without the full form. The omission of the 
usual form embarrasses the learner to a very considerable 
extent. 

DIRECTIONS. 

After having given the syn-clad-ology of the clads in 
the following exercises, turn to the exercises under pages 
49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62, 63, 68, 69, 70. 



SYNCLADOLOGY. 89 

EXERCISES IN SYN-CLAD-OLOGY. 

1. [This is the a pen] (6 with which) (I a wrote that 
letter. 6 ) 

2. [Make , ( , me) a coat] (with ten buttons.) 

3. [" The little birds have ceased their warbling :] (they 
are asleep) (on the boughs) (each , , ) (with 
his head) (behind his wing.") 

4. [He was presented] (with a sword.) 

5. [He walks] (with great speed.) 
8. [He went] (with me.) 

For more exercises, take pages 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 62. 
63, 68, 69, 70. 



LESSON VI. 

1. What is the etymology and meaning of po-e? (not 
are.) 

2. What is the etymology and meaning of ne-po-e ? 

3. How are clads divided with respect to their gnome- 
ology ? 

4. What is a po-e-clad. ? 

5. What is a ne-po-e-clad ? 

THE TEXT. 
The Gnomeology of Clads. 

Po-e is made hompoietes, a former, a maker, and means 
that which forms, or constitutes a sentence. 

Ne-po-e is derived from ne, not, and po-e, that which 
forms, or constitutes a sentence, and means that which 
does not form, or constitute a sentence. 

The gnomeology of clads respects the gnomodic, and 
the -want of the gnomodic character of clads. 

1. That clad which in itself constitutes, or forms, a 
gnomod, a sentence, is a _po-e-clad ; as, [" There was a 
man] (who was sent) (from God) {ivhose name was John. 19 ) 

" Who was sent" " whose name was John." 

iC Who was sent" contains a cordiction which is an affirmation. 
:: Whose name was John" contains a cordiction which is an af- 
firmation. 

8# 



90 DENDROLOGY. 

2. That clad which in itself does not form, does not 
constitute, a sentence, is a ne-po-e-clad ; as there was a 
man who was sent [from God.) 

From God does not contain a cordiction ; this clad, 
then, does not form, constitute, a sentence. 

REMARKS. 

The word, poietes, is the Greek word from which poe, 
the prefix part of po-e-clad, is formed, and signifies a 
former, a constituter . This word, poietes, is changed in 
its form, not for an import purpose, but for a frame-work 
one : poietes does not form quite so good a joint with clad, 
as po-e does. Now, as I have diminished the matter of 
poietes to suit my syntax purpose, so I have restricted the 
import of this word to adapt it to my indicative purpose : 
I do not mean by poe a former, a maker, in general, but a 
former, a constituter, of a sente?ice, a former of a gnomod, 
a cordiction. I believe that this modification in the form 
of the word, is sustained by philological law, and general 
usage, and that this slight restriction in the import of it, 
is not without either of these authorities. 

The great principle of verbal emigration, that ivords 
which are general in their import, may be made special, in 
their transit from one language to another, and vice 
versa, must be repealed before the new shade which ] 
have here given to the original import of poietes, can be 
effaced by the critic's breath. 

SPECIMEN 

Of giving the Gnomeology of Clads. 

(" In the beginning) [was the word :] (and the word 
was) (with God ;) (and the word was God.") 

2. in the beginning, 

a plenary, unbroken pleocorm ne-po-e-clad, belonging to 
the pleocorm. Connective reading : [The word was] (in 
the beginning.) 

3. and the word was, 

a plenary, unbroken ambi po-e-clad, belonging to the 
pleocorm, and a clad. Connective reading : [The word 
was] (in the beginning ;) (and the word was.) 



DENDROLOGY. 91 

4. with God, 

a plenary, unbroken clono ?ie-po-e-clad, belonging- to its su- 
perior clad. Connective reading : (and the word was) 
(with God.) 

5. and the ivord teas God, 

a plenary, unbroken clono ne-po-e-clad, belonging to its 
superior dads. Conjective reading : (and the word was) 
(with God) (and the ivord ivas God.) 

That is, add to the fact that the word was with God, 
the fact that " the word was God.'''' 

'•'•And the word was God 11 is not an ambi clad, for it does not depend 
upon the pleocorm. It is of the plus relation ; but stands conjected 
to two other dads. Hence it is a mere clono clad. 

EXERCISES. 

Give the gnomeologij, and the sijncladology of the clads 
in the following sentences. 

11 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 

1. " A tap , , , at the door, now announced 

11444 5 5 5 56 

the arrival of the priest ; and Edward retired while he 

6 7 7 7 666889 

administered, to both prisoners, the last rites of religion in 

9 9 10 10 10 11 11 10 

the mode which the church of Rome prescribes.' ' 

11 1 1 2 2 2 13 

2. " Shortly after, the drums of the garrison beat to 

3 

arms." 

11112 2 3 3 

3. " He had a sense of wearisomeness , , 

44 455 5 6 7 77 7 

from the motion of the carriage ; but in all other things, 

66688 8 8 8 

the day passed as a melancholy dream , ." 

1 111 2 2 21 

4. " Almost the first words , Arthur spoke were 

1 13 3 3 3 

those , , I have mentioned." 



92 MONOLOGY. 

11 1 1 2 2 2 2 

5. " His horses' hoofs struck upon the old wooden 

2 

bridge." 

1 1 12 2 2 

6. " The sound went to his heart." 

Ill 1 22 2222 

7. " It was here , his mother took her last leave 

3 3 4 4 4 4 

of him, and , blessed him." 

Now give the syncladology and gnome ology of all the 
dads in the various exercises under 'pages 49, 50, 51, 52, 
61, 62, 63, 68, 69, 70. 



LESSON VII. 

1. What is the etymology of monodone ? 

2. What is the meaning of monodone ? 

3. What does the last part of mono-done mean ? 

4. Into how many classes are monodones divided ? 

5. Can you repeat all the members of the first class of 
monodones ? 

6. Can you repeat all the members of the second class 
of monodones ? 

7. What is the difference between the first class of 
monodones, and the second class ? 

8. Are those words which have no ^ always mono- 
dones ? 

9. Can you repeat those members which are monodones 
in all cases ? 

10. Can you repeat those which may be so used as not 
to give a new mono ? 

11. Where a member of the second class, closes a pleo- 
co?°m, or a poeelad, does it give a new mono ? 

THE TEXT. 

The word, mo?i-o-do?ie, is derived from ?no?io, that num- 
ber of words, which can be taken alone, and dono to give, 



MONOLOGY. 



93 



and signifies those words which give, or commence, new 
monos. There are two classes of monodones. 

1. The first class is composed of those words which 
stand conjected to the new monos which they give. 

2, The second class of monodones, is composed of those 
words which stand conjected to the conn of the new mono, 
which they give. 



FIRST CLASS OF MONODONES, 



And 

And therefore 

And yet* 

And though 

And 

Although 

And so* 

As* 

As also* 

As well as 

Also*^ 

Again* 

Because 

Beside* 

Besides* 



{and) 



B 



eing 



# 



But* 

But though 

But although 

But however* 

Both* [and) 

Either* (or) 

Except* 

Excepting* 

Even* 

Even so 

Else 

For* (because) 

Further* 



Furthermore 

Hence* (therefore) 

However* (but) 

Howsoever 

Howbeit 

If 

Inasmuch 

Lest 

Likewise* 

Moreover 

Nay* 

Nathless 

Not only* (but) 

Nevertheless 

Notwithstanding 

No* 

Now* 

Neither* {nor) 

Or 

Or even* 

Otherwise* (or) 

Provided* (if) 

Save* 

Since* (as) 

Than 

Then* (therefore) 

Thence* (therefore) 

Therefore 



y4 




MONOLOGY. 






SECOND CLASS 


OF MONODONES. 


Above,* 


atwixt, 




during, 


save,* 


about,* 


before,* 




except,*-ing, 


*to,* 


across, 


behind, 




for,* 


touching,* 


after,* 


below, 




from, 


toward, 


against, 


beneath, 




in,* 


towards, 


amid, 


beside, 




into, 


through, 


amidst, 


besides, 




of* 


throughout, 


among, 


between, 




off* 


under, 


amongst, 


betwixt, 




on,* 


underneath, 


around, 


beyond, 




over,* 


unto, 


as,* 


but,* 




past,* 


up,* upon,^ 


at* 


D y> # 




regarding,* 


with,* 


athwart, 


concerning,* 


respecting,* 


within,* 


atween, 


down,* 




round,* 


without.* 



Where these w T ords close a pleocorm, or a poeclad, they 
are not monodones ; as, [John was spoken to.] [The 
books were called for.] 

FIRST CLASS OF MONODONES. 

The first class of monodones, is composed of those 
words which make sense with entire monos. 

Those words which have the * are not monodones in 
all instances. 

1. The following icords are always monodones : 



And 

although 

because 

furthermore 

howsoever 

howbeit 

if 



inasmuch 

lest 

moreover 

nathless 

notwithstanding 

or 



than 

therefore 

though 

unless 

whereas 

whether. 



I. The following are not monodones in all cases 



As 

as -well-as 

again 

being 

but " 

both 

either 



except, -ing 

else 

farther 

for 

further 

hence 

however 



likewise 

nay 

not-only 

no 

now 

neither 

otherwise 



provided 

since 

still 

then 

thence 

whether 

yet 





MONOLOGY. 




II. The following words 


are monodones in all cases . 


Across 


athwart 


besides 


through 


against 
amid 


atween 
atwixt 


between 
betwixt 


throughout 
underneath 


amidst 


because-of 


beyond 


unto 


among 


behind 


during 


upon 


amongst 


below 


from 


within 


around 


beneath 


toward 


without. 


as-to 


beside 


towards 




II. 


The folloiving are 


not monodones 


in all cases : 


Above 


down 


on 


touching 


about 


except 


over 


through 


after 
as 
at 
before 


excepting 

for 

in 

into 


past 

regarding 
respecting 
round 


throughout 
under 
underneath 
up 


but 
by 


of 
off 


save 
to 


upon 

with. 


concerning 







95 



LESSON VIII 



1. When is as a monodone of the first class ? 

2. In what do the two classes of monodones differ ? 

3. Where is as a monodone of the second class ? 

4. Can you repeat each monoizing rule ? 

I. As — First Class. 

1. As is a monodone, where it is used in the sense of 
because; as, I cannot aid him as I had not the means. 
As you have come you may stay. 

2. As is a monodone where it is used much in the sense 
of "like unto;" as, "ye shall be as Gods , ." 

3. As, after as far, is a monodone ; as, He threw the 
ball as far as we could see. 



96 MONOLOGY. 

4. As is a monoclone in a comparison of equality; as, 
Henry is as good as any man. 

Note. As before good, imports degree ; and is not a monoclone : 
(as good — so good.) 

II. As — Second Class. 

1 . As is a monodone where it is used much in the sense 
of, " in the character of;" as, John came as a prophet. 
That is, he came in the capacity of a prophet. 

Or, 

As is a monodone of the second class, where the thing 
which is mentioned after as, is the very one which is men- 
tioned in the superior mono ; as, John came as a prophet. 

John, and the prophet are the same person. 

As, negatively treated. 

1. As is not a monodone where it is used in the sense 
oiwhen; as, "As John came in, I went out." 

That is, when John came in, I went out. 

2. As is not a monodone where it imports degree ; as, 
this paper is as white as snow. 

That is, so white. 

MONOIZING RULES. 
RULE I. 

Every cordictive proposition, whether plenary, or im- 
plenary, constitutes a distinct mono ; as, [A certain man 
planted a vineyard,] (and , set a hedge,) (and ' , 
digged a place,) (and , built a tower,) (and 

, let it out,) (and , went.) 

RULE II. 

Every monodone gives a new mono ; as, " John is as 
i l l 

tall (as his brother.") 







MONOLOGY. 








RULE III. 




Every 


corme to which no clade can 


be conjected, 


stitutes an 


entire mono 


; as, 




Ah 


hark 


hurrah 


pish 


aha 


ha 


huzza 


poh 


alas 


ha ha ha 


hist 


pshaw 


all hail 


ha hah 


hush 


pugh 


alack 


hail 


10 


soho 


avaunt 


hey 


lo 


see* 


begone 


heigh 


look 


strange* 


behold* 


heighho 


mum 


tush* 


ch 


heyday 





what* 


fie 


ho 


of* 


welcome 


foh 


holla 


oh 
RULE IV. 


welladay, 



97 



Every address whether of one, or more words, consti- 
tutes a distinct mono ; as, (John,) come here, (my good 
child.) 

EXERCISES IN MONOIZING. 

Specimen. It is with the priest, as it is with the 
people. 

1. It is, one mono. Rule I. 

2. ivith the priest, one mono. Rule II. 

3. as it is, one mono. Rule II. 

4. with the people, one mono. Rule II. 



REMARK. 

To the monos which are given by the monodones of the 
first class, Rule I. is applicable. Rule I. is applicable 
to these monos because they all contain a cordiction. 
Still, the pupil should apply Rule II. to all these cases. 
He should do so because it is important to make him fa- 
miliar with the monodone character of those words which 
give new monos. 

exercises, 

To be monoized exactly according to the preceding 
specimen. 

9 



98 MONOLOGY. 

As. 

SPECIMEN. 

As it was dark, he fell. 

1. He fell, one mono. Rule I. 

2. as it was dark, one mono. Comment I. 

1. "As is a monodone where it is used in the sense of 
because; as, He fell because it was dark. 

REMARKS. 

1. As is not a monoclone where it is a corm, a founda- 
tion word, in the mono. 

2. As is a corme when same, such, much, or many is in 
a preceding mono. 

EXERCISES. 

(The pupil should repeat the rules in all instances — -a 
mere reference to them is not sufficient.) 

1. "I cannot aid him, as I have not the means." 

2. "Ye shall be as Gods 

3. " He threw the ball as far as we could see." 

4. "As it rains I cannot go." 

5. " Men are more happy as they are less involved in 
public concerns." 

6. " He is as good (as any man , .") 

7. "As , , with the people, so , , 
with the priest." 

8. "As your day is, so shall it be unto you." 

The last two examples are bad. They should read 
thus : 

As it is with the people, it is with the priest. 
As your day is, it shall be unto you. 

Fully Corrected. 

1. [It is with the priest] (as it is) (with the people.) 

2. [Your strength shall be] (unto you,) (as your day is.) 
1. John came as a prophet. (2.) 



MONOLOGY. 99 

2. They came to me as pupils. (3.) 

3. He came as a witness. (2.) 

4. I shall use this stick as a pen. (2.) 

5. I address you as his friend. (2.) 

6. John went into the field as a soldier. (3.) 

7. I meet you as a friend. (2.) 

l ill 

8. As he rose, he met his friend. 

9. This water is as cold as ice , 

10. Give , me such fruit as I purchased. 

REMARK. 

It may be well for the pupil to repeat the monoizing of 
the preceding exercises; and, in the repetition, he should 
give that comment on as, which applies to his case. 



LESSON IX. 

] When is as vjell as a monodone ? 

2. When is again a monodone ? 

3. When is being a monodone ? 

4. When is but a monodone ? 

5. When is both a monodone ? 

THE TEXT. 
1. As well as. 

1. As well as is a monodone when it is used much in 
the sense of and ; as, It is your duty as well as , , 

mine, John, as well as his brother , , was 
there. 

2. Again. 

2. Again is a monodone where it is used somewhat in 
the sense of moreover, or furthermore; as, " Again, the 
Lord shall judge his people." 

3. Being. 

3. Being is a monodone where it is used in the sense, 
and in the place of as, or because ; as, You may remain 



100 MONOLOGY. 

being you have come, Being he was wise, we gave 
heed to his counsel. This use of being is not good. 

4. But. 

1. But is a monodone where it indicates that what fol- 
lows is somewhat different from, or opposite to, what pre- 
cedes ; as, " John is good ; hut his brother is bad," " Man 
shall not live upon bread alone, but , , , 
upon every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of 
God." 

The word is a different kind of food from bread; hence, 
but is well used. 

2. But is a monodone where it imports that the result 
is contrary to, or different from, what might be expected ; 
as, Henry came to Boston ; but he did not remain here 
an hour , I will call ; but I cannot stay one minute. 

1. But imports that Henry's not remaining in Boston 
a longer time, was contrary to what was expected. 

2. But, in the second instance, indicates that the fact 
of my not being able to stay long enough to make a 
visit, was contrary to the expectations of him to whom I 
spake. 

3. But is a monodone when it is used in the sense of 
except, or be out; as, All the boys went but John, Mr. 
Jones has but one son. 

1. In the first, it is the province of but to exclude, to 
take out, one boy. Hence the affirmation, all the boys went, 
is corrected by the subtracting mono, " but John. 11 

2. In the second, the idea is that he has no son, if you 
take away one son. The object of has is not son express- 
ed, but son understood ; as, Jones has no son, but one 
son. 

That is, you exclude, take away, remove, one son, that 
\he affirmation " Jones has no son, 11 may not include this 
one son. This one son being excluded, taken out of the 
reach of the affirmation, " Jones has no son, 11 it follows 
that Jones has one son : this affirmation does not include 
the excluded one. " Jones has no son but or except 
one son. 

That is, exclude, take away, one son, and Jones has no 
son. 



MONOLOGY. 101 

1. " He is but a man." 

That is, he is nothing but a man. In other words, he 
is no being except a man. 

That is, if you except, exclude, remove man, he is no 
being whatever. 

2. " He gave me but a cent." 

That is, he gave me nothing but, or except, a cent. In 
other words, he gave me nothing, if you take out, re- 
move, exclude, or except, a cent. 

3. " He hath not grieved me but in part." 

That is, he hath grieved me in nothing i\ you except 
he hath grieved me in part. 

In other words, if you except, remove, or take out that 
he hath grieved me in part, he hath indeed grieved me in 
nothing at all. 

4. " I cannot but consider it a good work." 

That is, I cannot consider it any work, if you exclude, 
remove, or take away, that I consider it a good ivork. 

5. " Then said he unto his disciples, it is impossible but 
that offences will come ; hut wo unto them through whom 
they come." 

" It is impossible but that offences will come." 

That is, it is impossible for anything to come except 
that. Except what ? — offences will come. 

The word, anything, as here used, means two things 
only. One of the two things, is that offences will come, 
and the other of the two, is this, that offences ivill not come. 
Now, there are two things which belong to every event of 
which we can think ; namely, the happening of the 
event, and the not happening of it. In the above case, 
the not happening is said to be impossible. In what way 
is this said ? In saying that neither event can take place 
if you exclude, remove, take out, except, the happening of 
offences. For instance : John must either appear, or not 
appear, at the bar of God. Now, if you make it impossible 
for him not to appear, he must appear. 

It is impossible but that John will appear at the bar of 
God. 

That is, it is impossible for John to do anything but, 
except, appear at the bar of God. In other words, it is 
impossible for John to do either thing, if you except^ take 
9* 



102 MONOLOGY. 

out ■, or exclude his appearing at the bar of God. Why is 
it impossible for him to do either thing? There are but two 
things which he can do ; one is, to stay away, the other 
is, to appear. The expression makes it impossible for him 
to stay away. Hence it is said that he can do just 
nothing at all, if you except, exclude, his appearing. 
John must, however, do one of these things : he must 
either stay away from the bar of God, or he must appear 
at it. And, in order to show that John will appear at 
this bar, the sentence is so constructed as to express the 
impossibility of his staying away. 

It is impossible but that John will appear at the bar of 
God. 

[It is impossible] (for John to do anything) (but that) 
•(he will appear) at the bar) (of God.) 

But is employed only when the sentence is in an im- 
plenary state ; as, it is impossible but that John will 
appear at the bar of God. 

When the sentence is rendered plenary, except is em- 
ployed ; as, it is impossible for John to do anything except 
that, he will appear at the bar of God. 

As but is not suited to the plenary state of the sen- 
tence, so except is not to the implenary. 

It is impossible except that John will appear at the bar 
of God. 

It is impossible but that offences will come. 

Plenary. [It is impossible] (for offences to do anything) 
(but that,) (offences will come.) 

Now, offences must either come, or stay away. And, 
to indicate that they will come, the sentence is so con- 
structed as to express the impossibility of their staying 
away. Offences must do something. There are but two 
things which they can possibly do ; and one of these two 
things, the writer says, they will not do. This negative 
idea is expressed by saying that it is impossible for them 
to do anything, either thing, if you exclude, except, 
the affirmative thing. 

6. (" If I could but return,) [I should be happy. "] 
That is, if I could do anything but return, I should be 
happy. I am so very home -sick that I have not the power 



MONOLOGY. 103 

to do anything at all, except to return. If I could do 
anything but return, I should be happy. But the home- 
sick fever is so hot that I can do nothing but, except, 
return. How many things must I do ? I must do one of 
two ; I must either stay where I am, or I must return. 
The home-sick fever is so severe that I cannot remain 
where I now am : hence if you except, exclude, my 
return^ I can do nothing at all : 

[I should be happy] (if I could do anything but return.) 

It is worthy of remark that although but is here used 
in the sense of except, yet except cannot be substituted 
for but, while the sentence is in its implenary state. 

[I should be happy] if I could except return. 

The moment, however, the sentence is rendered plena- 
ry, except can be substituted for but. 

[I should be happy] (if I could do anything) {except 
return.) 

That is, if I could do anything when the return is 
taken from me, I could be happy. 

It may be replied to all this that, u but, in this case, is an 
adverb belonging to return. But can here be exchanged 
for only, hence but is an adverb. If I could only return, 
I should be happy." To this, I reply that equivalence 
in sense is not equivalence in grammar. Was it so, no, 
not, and nothing, would all be nouns, all adjectives, and 
ail adverbs. I saw no thing, I saw not a thing, I saw 
nothing. 

Now, the adjective, no, the adverb -not % and the noun, 
nothing, are all negatives in meaning. 

That this view of the word, but, will be opposed, admits 
of little doubt. But that it can be confuted, admits of 
great doubt. 

Can but, in the following instance, be turned into only ? 
;c It is impossible but that offences will come." 

7. "He had but a little heat." 

That is, he had no heat, except a little heat. 

It may be said by the old school grammarians, that but 
is here an adverb : they may urge the doctrine, in support 
of this position, that only can be substituted for but ; as, 
he had only a little heat. 

If the mere possibility of exchanging but for only, is 



104 MONOLOGY. 

authority for calling but an adverb, but is an adverb in 
the following instances : 

All went but James. I have but six apples. 

All went only John. I have only six apples. 

Now, it is admitted by all the old school grammarians, 
that but, in the instance, " All went but John," is a pre- 
position. In the following, however, but is called by the 
same class of grammarians, an adverb : 

" I have but six apples." 

If but is an adverb, what does it qualify ? Does but 
qualify have ? This cannot be, since this would change 
the sense of the sentence, in a very material point of 
view. This may be seen by substituting only for but, 
and by attempting to make it qualify have. 

" I only have six apples." 

If only qualifies have, the idea is that I only have 
them. That is, I do nothing but have them. 

But it may be said by some that but, or only, qualifies 
six. To this it may be replied that it is impossible to 
qualify any word whatever which has a fixed, an im- 
mutable, meaning. The word good, may be qualified ; as, 
very good, unusually good fruit. But how can six* be 
made to mean any more, or any less than six units ? 

8. " Man but for this were active to no end." 

That is, man except it were for this, were active to no 
end. 

Here but introduces a poeclad, namely, "U were," 

It may be said, however, that but cannot be used when 
this poeclad is expressed ; as, "Man but ' it were ' for this, 
were active to no end." 

That the introduction of this poeclad, subtracts from the 
euphony of the sentence, is admitted. Still this does not 
prove that this poeclad is not understood. It is an im- 
portant principle in our language that certain words which 
are synonymous, or nearly so, please the ear by a full 
expression of all the words, or by an omission of some of 
them. For instance : 

1. John was taught , grammar. 

2. John was instructed in grammar. 

When instructed is used, the steroclade, in, must be ex- 
pressed, for the omission of in offends the ear : 
John was instructed grammar. 



M0N0L0GY. 105 

Again. " John was offered a dollar for his knife." 
When this sentence is rendered plenary, offered offends 
the ear ; as, John was offered ivith a dollar for his knife. 
When the sentence is written in the plenary state, pre- 
sented must be used in the place of its synonyme, offered; 
as, John was presented with a dollar for his knife. 

Both. 

1. " He is both virtuous, and , , brave." 

112 1 2 2 2 2 

He is both virtuous, and he is brave. 

The mono which both gives, is this, " and he is brave " 
To this mono, both belongs. Both is employed to indi- 
cate the subjunction of an entire mono ; and the mind is 
so much under the influence of this indication, that it 
would be much disappointed, was this predicted mono 
withheld ; as, He is both virtuous. 

SPECIMEN 

Of monoizing under these comments. 

1. " The want of a correct history of this country, has 
long been a subject of complaint among those , 
who have charge of the public schools, as xoell as , , 

,,,(,,) among those 
, who teach in these institutions." 

j . The want has long been a subject, one mono, Rule 1. 

2. of a correct history, one mono, Rule II. 

3. of this country, one mono, Rule II. 

4. of complaint, one mono, Rule II. 

5. among those persons, one mono, Rule II. 

6. ivho have charge, one mono, Rule I. 

7. of the public schools, one mono, Rule II. 

8. as well as it has long been a subject, one mono, 
Rule II., and Comment I. 

As well as is a monodone Avhere it is used much in the 
sense of and, or add. 

9. of complaint, one mono, Rule II. 

10. among those persons, one mono, Rule II. 

11. who teach , , one mono, Rule I. 

12. in these institutions, one mono, Rule II. 



106 MONOLOGY. 

EXERCISES. 

J. (" Being you have come,) [you may remain. ") 

2. [" You may remain,] [being you have come.") 

3. ("Being you have written this copy well,) [I will 
set you another."] 

4. He is willing as well as , , able. 

l 11 

5. John, as well as I , , , is ready. 

l 1111 

6. Henry is both wise, and , , good. 

l ill ii 

7. And both Jesus, and his mother , , was 
there. 

8. He is both virtuous, and , ^ , brave. 

9. He was virtuous, and , , brave both. 

Note. — Whenever both is a monodone, it conveys a 
strong allusion to some interrogation, to which the sen- 
tence in which both is used, is an answer : " Was he 
virtuous ? " " He was both virtuous, and , , 

brave." 

Still, where both is the last word in the reply to the 
implied question, as in the ninth example, the mono 
which both indicates, is that to which and belongs. 

For, hence, however, not only, neither, either, otherwise, 
provided, then, thence, now, since, still, yet, &c. 

1. For is a monodone except where it closes a mono; 
as, the books have been spoken for. 

2. Hence is a monodone when it is used in the sense 
of therefore; as, It rains— hence I cannot go. 

3. However is a monodone when it is used in the sense 
of but; as, the gentleman came to Philadelphia — however 
he soon left. Or, he soon left, however. 

4. Not only is a monodone where it is followed by but ; 
as, He is not only learned but he is good. (Not only 
belongs to the mono ; " but he is good.''') 

5. Neither is a monodone when it is followed by nor; 
as, He is neither good, nor learned. Neither belongs to 
the mono, " nor is he learned." 



MONOLOGY. 107 

6. Either is a monodone when it is followed by or; as, 
He was either with John, or with James. 

Either belongs to the mono, " or he was" 

7. Otherwise is a monodone where it implies an alter- 
native ; as, " Man will be saved if he repents ; otherwise 
he will be lost forever." Man will repent if God gives him 
power — otherwise he will remain in his sins. God will 
give man power to repent — otherwise the Bible is not 
true. 

8. Provided is a monodone when it is used in the sense 
of if; as, We shall be there, provided it is a good day. 

9. Then is a monodone where it is used in the sense of 
therefore, or "in that case;" as, 

1. " It rains; then I cannot go." 

2. "Men transgressed the law." "What, then, was to 
be done ? " (What therefore was to be done ?) 

3. " If all this is so, then man has a natural freedom." 

4. " Now, then, be all thy weighty cares away." 

Then, and therefore, generally divide their monos into 
two parts. 

10. Thence is a monodone when it is used in the sense 
of therefore ; as, Goodness alone, gives peace — thence all 
should be good. 

11. Since is a monodone where it is used in the sense 
of for this reason ; as, 

1. (" Since I cannot return) [I must remain."] 

2. [" Man must die] {since he is not immortal.") 

3. [" You should take your umbrella] [since it may 
rain.") 

4. (" Since none (but a fool) can make a fire ;) (and 
since John can make a fire.) [it follows that] (John is a 
fool.") 

12. Now is a monodone where it is nearly equal to 
"from this fact," " in view of this, or that thing," " after 
all," " things being as they are," "you must know that." 

Now is a monoclade in all cases where it is not used in 
the sense of the mono, " at this time" or, " at that time." 



108 MONOLOGY. 

1. " Not this man, but Barabbas ; now, Barabbas was a 
robber." 

Here now has the sense of " you must know that" Ba- 
rabbas was a robber. 

2. Now, how is any man to learn the will of his Maker, 
except from the Bible, and his conscience ? 

Here noiv seems to have the sense of " things being as 
they are" or, " man being as he is, limited in intellect." 

Man being as he is, " how is any man to learn the will 
of his Maker, except from the Bible, and his conscience ? " 

3. " Now, if you will reform, John, all these things 
will soon be forgotten ; and you will soon be restored to 
good standing among us." 

Noiv, here, has the sense of after all. 
After all, " if you will reform," &c. 

4. " Now, I know that the Lord will do me good, seeing 
I have a Levite for. my priest." 

Now, seems to indicate that the means by which Micah 
knows that the Lord Avould do him good, is some special 
event which has been mentioned, or which is to be men- 
tioned in connection with this verse. Noiv is here nearly 
synonymous with from this fact. 

From this fact, I know that the Lord will do rne good. 
What fact ? "I have a Levite for my priest." 

5. " Now, we know that thou hast a devil." 

That is, we know this from the fact which we have just 
witnessed. 

6. " Noiv, I beseech you, my dear brother, to refrain 
from this vice." 

In view of the dreadful consequences, I beseech you, my 
dear brother, to refrain from this vice. 

13. Still is a monodone where it is used in the sense 
of nevertheless ; as, Henry has been taught — still he is 
ignorant, John has possession still — still he has no right 



MONOLOGY. 109 

to the property, the call is still made, — still men remain 
in their sins. 

14. Yet is a monoclone where it is used much in the 
sense of but, nevertheless ; notwithstanding, and indicates 
that the result is different from what might have been 
looked for ; as, 

1. " He eats heartily ; yet he has no strength." 

2. " He gives Avise counsel to others ; yet his own deeds 
are unwise acts." 

3. " They have promised ; yet they do not perform." 

4. " They still hold possession ; yet they have no right 
to the property." 

Id. Else is a monodone when it is used in the sense of 
otherwise; as, 

L I must get his consent ; else I cannot go. 

2. " Thou desirest not sacrifice ; else would I give it." 

3. " Repent, or else will I come to thee quickly." 
Or is redundant. 

1. Else may be a metaclade ; as, What man else can be 
found? (other.) Who else can he be ? What else will you 
have ? 

2. Else may be a clonoclade; as, Where else can we go ? 

16. Nay is a monodone where it is used in the sense 
of more; as, he asked me for my purse — nay, he demand- 
ed it. 

1. Nay is a clonoclade where it has a negative import ; 
as, " I tell you nay — but, except ye repent, ye shall all 
likewise perish." 

2. Nay may be a corm ; as, " His answer was nay" 
11 He that will not when he may, when he would, he shall 
have nay." 

17. No is a monodone where it is used in the sense of 
nay, where nay means more ; as, " No man could bind 
him — no, not with chains." (No, not any man could 
bind him) (with chains.) 

18. Again, Farther, Further, Furthermore. These 
words appear to be monodones when the sentence is so 

10 



110 PLEOLOGY. 

implenary that they indicate addition, rather than repeti- 
tion ; as, 

" And again, the Lord shall judge his people." 

1. " For we know him that hath said, vengeance be- 
longeth unto me, and I will recompense, saith the Lord,' 5 

And again, " The Lord shall judge his people." 

Paul wished to establish the fact that vengeance belongs 
exclusively to God. To do this, he brings, in the first 
place, the following words : 

" Vengeance belongeth unto me" 

In the next place, he adduces the following : 

" I will recompense" 

Having twice drawn proof from the Lord himself to 
sustain the position that God only, has the right of punish- 
ing his people, Paul says, 

And I again prove this fact from the following scripture : 
" The Lord shall judge his people." 

Again, is not a monodone, but a clonoclade, an adverb 
belonging to prove understood. 



LESSON X. 

1. What is the etymology, and meaning of ple-ol-o-gy ? 

2. What is the etymology, and meaning of lei-pol-o-gy ? 

3. What is said of and in this lesson ? 

4. Have you examined all the cases in which monos, 
and sentences should be left in the implenary state ? 

5. Can you give six of these cases ? 

6. What is the etymology, and meaning of no-e-ton ? 

THE TEXT. 

PLE-OL-O-GY, AND LEI-POL-O-GY. 

1 Ple-ol-o-gy is derived from pleo, full, and logos, doc- 



PLEOLOGY. Ill 

trine, and means the principles on which monos, and sen- 
tences should be written in the plenary state. 

2. Lei-pol-o-gy is made from lei-po, to omit, to leave out, 
and logos, doctrine, and signifies the principles on which 
monos, and sentences should be left in the implenary state. 

REMARKS. 

As the ease, accuracy, and despatch with which a per- 
son uses our language, depend, in a high degree, upon 
bis knowledge of these two cardinal doctrines, I have 
thought it important to give them appropriate technical 
names. And to enable the pupil to give these great doc- 
trines, that attention which their magnitude demands, 1 
have made a full development of them. 

A desire for despatch is a leading trait in the character 
of men ; and, in few things, is this trait more obvious than, 
in their contrivance for brevity in the communication of 
thought. Language is the distinguished medium through 
which mind travels to mind. And, as though this medium 
was a hollow cylinder through which ideas roll from 
mind to mind, men have sedulously studied despatch by 
abridging its length. There are instances, however, in. 
which this medium cannot be abridged by an omission of 
any of its parts — and, while pleology respects these cases, 
leipology respects those in which it may, and should, be 
abridged by the omission of both words, and monos. 

The parts which are omitted under the doctrine of 
leipology, are called no-e-tons. This word is made from 
no-e-tos, which means what is perceived by the mind 
without falling under the senses. A no-e-ton, then, is that; 
word of a mono, or that mono of a sentence, which the 
mind perceives without the aid of the ear, or eye ; as, 

[John gave ( , me) a book,] ( , last evening.) 

The mind perceives the to before me, and the on before 
last, although these words are not there. To, and on are 
no-e-tons. 

That is, these words are the words which the mind per- 
ceives without either seeing, or hearing them. 

To, and on are no-e-tons of monos. In the following 
instance, " it was" is a no-e-ton of a sentence : 



112 PLEOLOGY. 

" John got what he wanted :" 

[John got what thing] {it ivas) [which he wanted,) 

Thing, and which are noetons of monos. 

I. PLEOLOGY. 

Pleology respects the principles on which a mono, and 
a sentence should be written in the plenary state. 

PRINCIPLES. 

1. Every mono should have all its zvords, and every 
sentence, all its monos, expressed, where the implenary 
state of either, would produce ambiguity, or mar the eu- 
phony. 

Illustrations. 

1. " Have we not power to lead about a wife as well as 
other apostles ? " 

The omission of the word, wife, would produce much 
ambiguity, and very much mar the euphony of the sen- 
tence : 

Have we not power to lead about a — as well as other 
apostles ? 

Still the omission of the words after the word, apostles, 
improves the euphony of the sentence without producing 
any ambiguity : 

Have we not power to lead about a wife as well as 
other apostles have power to lead about a ivife ? 

In the following, the words that bear the same rela- 
tion which the word, wife, bears in the preceding sentence, 
are omitted with great propriety : 

" Mine answer to them that examine me, is this : 
Have we not power to eat , and drink , ? " 

But this sentence is implenary to a much greater extent 
than that which is produced by the omission of the words 
that would express what we have power to eat, and 
drink ; as, bread, meat, wine, water, &c. This may be 
seen from the following : 



PLEOLOGY. 113 

" Have we not power to eat , ) (and , , , , 
drink , ?) 

Plenary : Have we not power to eat food, and have we 
not power to drink drink ? 

3. " By grace are ye saved through faith: and that not 
of yourselves, it is the gift of God." 

The implenary state of this sentence produces so much 
ambiguity that even commentators have not been able to 
agree among themselves respecting its true import : 

(By grace) [are ye saved] ( , , ) (through 
faith;) (and that , , not) (of yourselves) ( , 
it is the gift) (of God.) 

As the sentence now stands, men are saved directly by 
grace, and directly by faith. But how can a man be saved 
by both ? That man who was killed with a sword, never 
was killed with an axe ! Some mono is understood after 
the pleocorm. 

The second ambiguity in this sentence, arises from the 
ellipses after that. "And that " — And that what ? And 
that grace is not of yourselves — or and that faith is not 
of yourselves ? Or is it neither ? What is the genuine, 
theological, no-e-ton after that ? If grace is the legitimate 
no-e-ton, that is properly used, for that refers to the first 
thing mentioned. But, if faith is the true no-e-ton, that 
should give place to this, for this refers to the last thing 
mentioned. It appears to me, however, that salvation 
may be the true theological no-e-ton : if so, that is used 
with marked propriety : 

[Ye are saved] (by grace) {which cometh) (through faith;) 
(and that salvation is not of yourselves ;) {for it is the 
gift) (of God.) {See Part III., p. 30.) 

In the following, the omission of the demi-mono, ** to 
see, 11 produces no ambiguity, but it mars the euphony : 

" But these were more noble than those of Thessalonica, 
searching the scriptures daily , , whether these 
things were so." 

10* 



114 LEIPOLOGY. 

II. LEIPOLOGY 

Respects the principles on which monos, and sentences 
should be left in the implenary state. 

General Principle. 
Every mono, and every sentence, should be left in the 
i?nvlenary state when this state neither produces ambigu- 
ity, nor mars the euphony. 

EXAMPLES OF IMPLENARY MONOS. 

1. [He drank water] ( , last evening.) 

2. [Give , ( , me) some water.] 

3. [He rode] (to town) ( , last week.) 

4. [Henry eat] (with his brother) ( , yesterday.) 

Let the pupil supply the no-e-tons in the above cases. 
That is, let him supply those words which he finds 
through his judgment only. 

EXAMPLES OF IMPLENARY SENTENCES. 

1. "I have some recollection of my father's being ( , 

, ) ( , a judge.") 

2. " John had an opportunity (of viewing the scene) 
(for , , ) ( , . > ) (above an hour.") 

3. [This book has been compiled] (with a special refer- 
ence) (to the public reading schools) (of this city.) 

[It is the result] (of an attempt to supply the want) 
(which has long been a subject) (of complaint) (among 
those) (whom the citizens (of Boston) have charged) (with 
the general superintendence) (of their public schools;) (as 
well as , , , i , ,)(,,) 
(with those) (who are appointed) (to the immediate in- 
struction) (of them.) 

4. (By grace) [are ye saved] ( , , ) (through 
faith.) 

Let the pupil supply the no-e-ton i?ionos, in the above 
sentences. He may also supply the no-e-ton words in the 
implenary monos. 

That, and that only, is a no-e-ton which is a legitimate 



LEIPOLOGY. 115 

member of the mono, or of the sentence. There is much 
danger of the pupil's introducing illegitimate no-e-tons, 
for much attention is necessary for him to find the legiti- 
mate ones. Before the word, hand, in the following sen- 
tence, the old school grammarians, who are governed by 
the Latin, and Greek rules, supply as to, he, and being : 

(And he came forth] ( , , bound) ( , , 
hand,) (and , , , ) '( , , foot.") 

As follows : [He came forth,] (he being bound) (as to 
his hand, and he being bound) (as to his foot.) 

"Being" and " as to" are illegitimate, spurious, no-e- 
tons : these are not the words which the mind perceives 
through the sense of the sentence, but through a common 
Latin rule which has no application in this case. "Being" 
and " as to " change the sense of the proposition. " Be- 
ing" indicates that his being bound was the cause of his 
coming forth ; and " as to " carries the idea of concerning! 
He was bound hand and foot, therefore he came forth ! 

A little reflection will show that the legitimate no-e-tons 
are " while he ivas" and " at." 

[He came forth zohile] (he was bound) at the hand ; 
(and he came forth ivhile) (he was bound) (at the foot.) 

If the word, or mono, which is supplied, does not give 
the exact sense, the word, and mono are spurious no-e-tons. 

" He was bound as to his hand, and foot." 

"As to " changes the idea of place into that of concern- 
ing. " Concerning" the only idea expressed by " as to," 
does not respect place, but the act of the mind ; as, " We 
have not been able to learn anything as to the number 
killed and wounded." 

In the above instance, the idea is not that of mental 
concernment, but that of place : not, however, the place of 
the mind, but the place of the grave-clothes. And he that 
was dead came forth, bound, hand, and foot, with grave- 
clothes. 

And. 

1. And may give a pleocorm, and a poeclad ; but it 
can never give a rce-poeclad ; as, [" And they had then a 
notable prisoner,] (called Barabbas.") 



116 LEIPOLOGY. 

2. When and is the first word in a full, a complete 
period, it gives the pleocorm — but if and is not the first 
word in the sentence, it gives a poeclad ; as, [The chief 
priests took the silver pieces,] {and said.) 

3. When the same predicate belongs to both persons, 
or things, the poeclad which and gives should be left in 
the implenary state ; as, ["Paul {and Silas , , ) 
sang praises] (to God.") 

The predicate is " sang praises to God." And, as this 
predicate belongs to both Paul and Silas, the poeclad 
given by and, should be implenary. If, however, the 
same predicate does not belong to both, the poeclad given 
by and, should not be implenary ; as, ["Jesus stood] (before 
the governor;) (and the governor asked him.") 

What is here said, predicated, of Jesus, is not predicated 
of the governor. It is predicated of Jesus that he stood 
before the governor. But it is predicated of the governor 
that he asked Jesus a question. 

4. When different things are predicated of the same 
person, the poeclad given by and, should generally be left 
in the implenary state ; as, [And he cast down the silver 
pieces,] {and , departed,) {and , went,) 
[and , hanged himself.) 

5. When and falls before of, in, vnth, or any other 
member of the second class of monodones, the poeclad 
given by and, should be left in the implenary state ; as, 
[I heard] of John, {and , , ) (of Joseph.) 

Remark.— The member of the second class, before 

which and falls, is often understood ; as, I heard of John, 

{and , , ) ( , Joseph,) "Are ye come 

out as against a thief, with swords, (and , , , 

) ( , staves?") 

REMARKS. 

Perhaps the common aphorism, "what is everybody's 
business is nobody's" is as strikingly exemplified in the 
general neglect with which the language of any nation is 
treated, as in anything in which men have a community 
of interest. The abuses which a language suffers, are 
rarely corrected : they are permitted to continue till that 
ear on which they at first grate, loses its power to distin- 
guish between harmony and discord. And, as what is 



LEIPOLOGY. 117 

right in sound, is just in grammar, the true genius of the 
language, is often disregarded even by the best scholars. 
The English language might be much improved : and, 
was it not that what is the business of everybody, is that 
of nobody, we might hope for important simplifications in 
our vernacular tongue. As it is, little, or nothing can be 
expected but a continuation of such changes as deform 
our language by a total disregard to its grammatical 
principles. It is not my intention to mention the nu- 
merous instances which these remarks embrace. It 
becomes necessary, however, to introduce one in which 
we depend, not upon the language employed, but upon 
the nature of the subject on which we speak, for what we 
wish to express. For instance : " John, and James are 
good hoys." 

It is here said that John are good boys, and that James 
are good boys ! The writer, however, depends upon his 
readers to correct this error in the expression, from the 
nature of the subject itself. That this is bad English, 
may be proved from supplying the ellipsis which even 
all the old school grammarians admit : John are good 
boys ; and James are good boys. 

Again. " John, and James write letters." 

By rendering these monos plenary, it will be seen that 
the sentence is not English : 

John write letters ; and James write letters. 

Nothing is more obvious than that write can have no 
syntax relation with "John." We do not say John write, 
but John writes. 

Can it be replied that it is not pretended that lorite has 
a syntax relation with John ? Why, John is said to be in 
the nominative case to write, and write is said to be a 
verb of the plural number, agreeing in number with the 
nominative, John ! But, as write is of the plural, and 
John, of the singular, how is it possible for ivrite to agree 
in number with John ? Can W. agree in opinion with 
J. when W.'s opinion is entirely different from J.'s ? 

It may be replied, however, that write agrees with 
John and brother, in number. If write agrees with John 
and brother too, it certainly agrees with John. Yet, 
how, yea, how can write, which is plural, agree in num- 



118 LEIPOLOGY. 

ber with John, which is singular ? How can two men 
agree in opinion about the value of a certain house, when 
one of the two thinks it worth $8,000, and the other, 
$4,000 only? 

With a view to an impartial investigation of this sub- 
ject, it will be necessary to settle, in the first place, 
whether there are ellipses in those constructions in which 
and falls between twocormsor nouns, of the singular 
number. And, as a preliminary step in the decision of 
this point, it maybe well to see whether there are ellipses 
where and falls between corms of the plural number : 

1. " Girls, and boys are human beings." 

2. " Girls, and boys were present." 

3. " Girls, and boys write copies/' 

4. " Girls, and boys have books.," 

Must not every grammarian admit that the following is 
the true rendering of these sentences ? 

1. " Girls are human beings ; and boys" are human 
beings. 

2. " Girls were present ; and boys" were present. 

3. " Girls write copies ; and boys" write copies. 

4. " Girls have books ; and boys" have books. 

Now, as it must be allowed that this rendering is 
consistent with the very genius of the doctrine of ellip- 
sis in English sentences, how can it be said that the fol- 
lowing sentences have no ellipses ? 

1. A girl, and a boy are human beings. 

2. A girl, and a boy were present. 

3. A girl, and a boy ivrite copies. 

4. A girl, and a boy have books. 

But, say the old school grammarians, as the allowing 
of ellipses in these sentences, produces a gross incongruity 
in one instance, between the language, and the sense, and 
a gross violation of the first rule in our common gram- 
mars in the others, no ellipsis can be allowed. If an 
ellipsis is allowed in the first instance, the writer will be 
made to say that one girl is two, or more human beings ! 
This, however, is the case, whether the ellipses are allowed 
or not : 

1. "A girl, and a boy are human beings. 1 ' 



LEIPOLOGY. 119 

1. What is the predicate of this sentence ? That is, 
what is the thing, or fact, which is affirmed ? The predi- 
cate is, " human beings" 

2. Of what, or of whom, is this the predicate ? In 
other words, to what, or to whom, is the fact of being 
" human beings" ascribed ? If I say, " John is a thief" 
it is predicated, or said, of John, that he is a thief. 

And, if I say, " John is thirty thieves ," it is predicated 
of John, that he is thirty thieves. 

1. Is anything said, or predicated, of a girl, in the fol- 
lowing sentence ? 

" A girl, and a boy are human beings." 

2. Is there anything said, or predicated, of a boy, in 
the following sentence ? 

"A girl, and a boy are human beings." 

What is this predicate? are "human beings." A girl, 
yes, one girl, then, is said to be human beings, even with- 
out allowing any ellipsis I 

It maybe replied, however, that nothing is predicated 
of the girl separately horn, the boy, and nothing, of the 
boy, separately from the girl. In answer, it may be said 
that, if nothing is predicated of these two persons sepa- 
rately, there is nothing at all predicated of them. I 
challenge all the learning which is in the heads and boohs 
of men, to show that, a sentence comprising but one verb, 
whether that verb is simple, or compound, can predicate 
anything of two things, unless these two things are em- 
braced in owe, and the same noun, or corm! For instance, 
The pens are good, We are pupils. 

It is a truth which is worthy of the admiration of the 
philologist, that the verb which affirms of John, cannot 
affirm of James unless both individuals are embraced in 
one, and the same corm, or noun ! If these individuals 
are mentioned in different words, whatever is said, predi- 
cated, of them, must be said, must be predicated, in dif- 
ferent monos ; as, "John, and James are sick." 

That is, John is sick; and James is sick. 

" John, and James are sick." 

Something is here affirmed of John; and something is 
affirmed of James. Are, however, makes but one affirma- 
tion ! Here are two persons, John and James : and, that 



120 LEIPOLOGY. 

something may be affirmed of both, there must be two 
affirmations ! Are makes but one affirmation — and this 
one affirmation concerns John only. Hence, if there is 
not an are understood, nothing whatever is said of James ! 

1. [" Girls, (and boys , , , ) are human beings."] 

2. [" A girl, and a boy are human beings."] 

The objection which the old school grammarian offers 
to allowing ellipses in the second sentence, is founded 
upon the incongruity of making one being two beings. I 
have shown, however, that this incongruity does not spring 
from allowing the ellipsis : I have proved that this incon- 
gruity, this want of sense, exists even when the sentence 
is considered a plenary paragraph ! But an ellipsis does 
not depend upon the sense of a sentence : an ellipsis de- 
pends upon the syntax genius of the sentence. In the 
two following sentences, the sense is the same ; yet, in 
the first, there is an ellipsis ; in the second, none : 

1. ["I gave ( , John) an apple."] 

2. [" I gave an apple] (to John.") 

What, is a numeral difference to decide upon cases of 
ellipses ? Impossible. If a difference in number could 
exert any influence over cases of ellipses, the mono which 
than gives, might be plenary, or implenary, according to 
the number of the corm : 

1. "John is taller (than we , .") 

2. "John is taller (than /.") 

This incongruity of which the old school grammarians 
complain, must exist as long as our language remains in- 
competent to express distinctly, what it now leaves to the 
nature of the subject to decide : 

1. " Six, and six are twelve." 

2. " The names of the men, killed, were Johnson, Ste- 
phenson, Jones, and Nathans." 

3. " The names of the two prisoners, were Ja?ieway, 
and Lewis." 

1 . In the first, it is affirmed that, six is twelve I 

2. In the second, it is affirmed that, the names are" Joh?i- 
son ! If, then, the expressed idea is to be regarded, the 
word, Johnson, is more than one name I 



LEIPOLOGY. 121 

Nor is this all ; for it is also affirmed, and that too with 
an exactness which excludes ambiguity, that all the. men 
who were killed, were named Johnson ! " The names of 
the men, killed, were Johnson ! " 

Nor indeed is this all ; for, strange as it may appear, 
this very sentence affirms, absolutely, that all the men were 
named Stephenson, that they were all named Jones, and 
that they were all named Nathans I 

This confusion is not the offspring of any ellipsis : it is 
the effect of an obvious incompetency in the language to 
express the just ideas in the case. 

To remove this incompetency, some means must be 
contrived for making two singular corms precisely syno- 
nymous in syntax, with one plural one. Until this is 
done, this constant catachresis, this desperate abuse of lan- 
guage, must continue.^ 

Will it be said that this contrivance is found in and 1 : 
Does and make two singular corms synonymous in syn- 
tax, with one plural one ? How, in what way ? By in- 
dicating that the things mentioned by the two singular 
corms, are to be taken together ; as, John, and his brother, 
are coming. 

The word, and, say the old school grammarians, indi- 
cates that John is to be taken, not alone, but with his 
brother ; and that the brother is to be taken, not alone, 
but with John. What, then, is the difference between 
and, and with ? 

1. " John, and his brother are coming.' ' 

2. " John with his brother, is coming.' ' 

Does not with indicate that John and the brother are to 
be taken together ? Why, then, do we not say — John 
with his brother, are coming ! (Not is !) What now be- 
comes of the doctrine upon which the verb is made plural 
when and occurs between two singular corms ? If the 

* A catachresis is a gross impropriety in speech. It is called by 
distinguished rhetoricians, a desperate abuse of words. It is the ex- 
pressing of one idea by the name of another, which is incompati- 
ble with, and often contrary to it. "It is," says a distinguished 
writer , '-when the speech is hard, strange, and unwonted" 

These instances are grossly contrary to the general usage of our 
language in similar cases. (Cata, against, and chresis, use.) 
11 



122 LEIPOLOGY. 

doctrine, that the verb, the gnomaclade, should be plural, 
when the individuals denoted by singular corms, are taken, 
not separately, but together, is sound, then indeed the fol- 
lowing are correct English sentences : 

1. John with his sister were at church ! 

2. John were at church with his sister ! 

3. John with his mother are ill with a cold ! (not is.) 

4. A book with a pen have fallen ! 

5. A watch with its chain have been lost ! (not has.) 

6. A horse with his saddle have been found ! (not has.) 

7. The horse with his saddle were injured ! (not was.) 

Now, it is the very province of with to unite one thing 
to another, and thereby to compel the reader to take them 
together. Yet, even under this connection, two singular 
corms are not the syntax synonyme of one plural one. 
(Syn-o~ni?n,) How, then, can it be pretended that under 
that species of connection, which and indicates, two sin- 
gular corms exert the same syntax influence over the verb, 
or gnomaclade which one plural corm exerts ? With 
does bind one thing to another; as, a house with an iron 
roof. But and never, never, connects one thing with 
another thing, nor one word with another word. And 
signifies the subjunction, the addition, of an entire propo- 
sition, of an entire cordiction, to some proposition, to some 
cordiction, of superior rank, in the sentence, or paragraph ; 
as, 

" John, and his wife have six children." 

This is an instance of gross catachresis. It is here 
affirmed that John has six children, and that his wife has 
six children. And, was it not that what belongs to the 
husband, belongs also to the wife, and vice versa, this par- 
agraph would give these parents twelve children instead 
of six ! 

" John, and his wife have six children." 

That is, John have six children, and his wife have six 
children. 

The catachresis, this desperate abuse of have, still re- 
mains. Hence I deem it of some importance to subjoin a 
few observations upon this particular point : 



LEIPOLOGY. 123 

It is contended that and actually connects two single in- 
dividuals, and thus constitutes plurality ; as, " He came 
forth, bound hand and foot." 

" And" here, say the old school grammarians, connects 
hand and foot, and thus makes them plural ! 

This is a curious doctrine indeed. What! is it necessa- 
ry to connect the hand with the foot to make them two ? 
Do not these limbs amount to two without being tied 
together ? 

These limbs, however, were not connected. Examine 
the sentence : 

" And he came forth, bound hand, and foot with 
grave-clothes." 

Will it be pretended that the foot was bound to the 
hand, or the hand to the foot ? No. 

What, then, does and connect? Does and connect the 
mere words, hand and foot ? There is no connection, 
not one particle, between these two words. Take the 
following : 

" Salt, and meat are very scarce." 

Is there any connection between the words, salt and 
meat ? None whatever. If and connects these words, 
there must be a connection between them. But there is 
no connection between them : hence and does not connect 
them. If, however, we remove and, the removal will 
produce a connection between these very words : 

Salt meat is very scarce. 

And, then, does not connect words : it separates them. 

To arrive at a just conclusion upon this subject, it will 
be 'necessary to settle a preliminary question : What does 
and mean ? u And " is the sign of addition, the sign 
that something which follows and, is to be added to some- 
thing which precedes and ; as, 

1. "I, and he are sick." 

2. "I, and thou are well." 

Now, is the word, he, added to the word, I, or is the real 
person denoted by the word, he, added to the real person 
denoted by the word, I? 

Neither is word added to word, nor person to person ; 
but affirmation to affirmation. In other words, proposition 
to proposition. 



124 LEIPOLOGY. 

" The saddle, and horse were injured." 

The old school grammarians parse and as a conjunction, 
connecting horse, and saddle. The very import of and 
stands directly opposed to this disposition of the word. 
This conjunction, or rnonoclade, means add. It is equal 
in import, to the verb, add. The reader, or hearer, then, 
understands from and, that he is to add something. 
Now, there can be nothing added where there is not 
something already presented to which an addition may be 
made. In the preceding sentence, the saddle is mentioned 
first — the saddle being introduced, the word, and, is em- 
ployed as a sign of some addition. And the question is, 
what is it which is to be added ? Is the real horse to be 
added to the real saddle ? If so, we should find, not the 
saddle put upon the horse, but the horse upon the saddle ! 
This theory works so ill in practice, that I believe even Mr. 
Murray himself would disown it ! Let us, now, inquire 
w T hether it is the word, horse, which is to be added to the 
word, saddle. Upon this principle, the thing injured was 
not the saddle, but the word, saddle ! 

" The saddle, and horse were injured." 

But, why add the word, horse, to the word, saddle ? 

" Why, that the noun, horse, may meet with the same 
fate which the word, saddle, suffers." ! 

This would be plausible logic if the word, saddle, was 
injured — but as not one hair of the noun, saddle, is in- 
jured, I do not see the propriety of binding by means of 
this verbal girth, and, the noun, horse, to the noun, saddle, 
in order to procure some injury to the noun, horse ! 
What, connect the signs in order to affect the things signi- 
fied ! This sort of philosophy would imprison the por- 
trait to punish the criminal whom it represents ! No, 
no — let us reject this chaff, and resort to the kernel. 

" The saddle, and horse were injured." 

That is, the saddle was injured; and the horse was 
injured. In other words, the saddle was injured, add that 
the horse was also injured. The author of the sentence 
first asserts in a plenary mono, that the saddle was 
injured. Having done this in a plenary mono, he says, 
add to the fact that the saddle was injured, the fact that 
the horse was also injured. The mono which and intro- 



LEIPOLOGY. 125 

duces, is that which follows and, as may be seen by ren- 
dering both monos full : 

[The saddle was injured ;] and (the horse was injured.) 

And, then, is a monocl&de, and is used to introduce an 
additional mono into the sentence. 

But I may be told that the introduction of this new 
mono, produces an error in the number of the gnomaclade, 
were. 

To this I reply that the introduction of this new mono, 
demonstrates that the gnomaclade, or verb, should be in 
the singular, in all similar constructions : 

1. I, and he are. 

2. I, and thou are. 

The use of are, for is, in the first, and are for art, in 
the second, sentence, is opposed to propriety in speech, 
and to solution in grammar. Are never can be made to 
have any syntax relation with he — he are ! Nor can are 
hold any syntax relation with thou — thou are ! 

It is pretended, however, that I, and he, are united by 
and. Be it so, though it is not so. Now, if these two 
pronouns are united, they have become one — singular. 
Can the plural number be formed by putting two words 
into one ? 

It matters not in what way I and he are united, since 
no union can render either one, or both plural. Will 
that union which may be produced between two chairs, 
by placing a string about a round of one, and then about 
a round of the other, produce plurality ? Is there not 
plurality as much before the application of the string, as 
after ? There are two chairs before the string is applied, 
and there are two after. The use of this string does not 
make the two single seats into one plural one ! To make 
a chair plural, there must be as many as tioo seats in the 
same frame-work. The plural noun is one frame-work, 
not two; as, boohs, pens! 

Now, u book," and " pen," cannot be considered plural 
simply because they happen to be used in the same sen- 
tence : these words cannot be put together in such a way as 
will constitute plurality. Nor can the real pen, and the real 
book be expressed in tioo words in such a manner as will 
11* 



126 LEIPOLOGY. 

constitute plurality in grammar. For so long as these 
things are denoted by two distinct words, they are taken 
separately, both by the mind, and by the corms, the means 
employed to denote them ; as, book, and pen. But 
plurality in grammar is found where two, or more things 
are seized at the same time, and by the same word ; as, 
books. 

When two, or more things are denoted separately, there 
is no plurality ; as, " I, and he are, I, and thou are." 

Here the individuals are denoted separately, hence, 
while, there appears, from a slight glance, to be but one 
affirmation in a sentence, there are in truth two. One is 
made by expressed words, the other by implied ones : — 

[I, (and he , ) are,] [I, (and thou , ) are.] 

Now, by rendering these monos plenary, we shall con- 
vince all of the gross error which we trust the world will 
gradually, and gladly correct : 

1. [I are,] (and he are.) 

2. [I are,] (and thou are.) 

Corrected : 

1. [I am,~\ (and he is.) 

2. [I am,] (and thou art.) 

But the monos of course should be left in their imple- 
nary state; as, 

1. I, and he is. 

2. I, and thou art. 

Improper : 

1. I, and he ivrite. 

2. He, and thou write. 

Proper : 

1. I, and he lorites. 

2. He, and thou writest. 

Rendered plenary: 

1. I write, and he torites. 

2. He tvrites, and thou writest. 



LEIPOLOGY. 127 

1. I, and he write. 

2. He, and thou write. 

By rendering these monos plenary, it is seen that they 
are actually bad English : 

1. I write, and he tvrite ! 

2. He write , and thou write ! 

In instances in which or occurs, the gnomaclade, or 
vSrb, is properly used : {no-ma-clade.) 
I, or he is. He, or thou art. 

Rendered plenary : I am ; or he is, He is ; or thou art. 

In order to show the extent to which syntactical reso- 
lution is crippled by this total obliquity from the true 
genius of our language, I will parse these pronouns and 
verbs : 

" I, and he are." 

1. I, a pronoun, first person singular, and in the nomi- 
native case. But, to what verb ? No one knows — every 
grammarian is mute ! Can / be nominative to are ! Is 
I are English ? 

2. He, a pronoun, third person, singular, and in the 
nominative case to are I He are ! He are sick ! This, 
if possible, is worse than Mr. Murray's " thirteenth, and 
fourteenth editions I " Thirteenth apples I 

Directions. — In ?nonoizing, the pupil should turn all 
these cases into correct English. This will teach him the 
true construction. But, for the present, at least, he should 
be taught to speak, and write, not according to truth, but 
according to custom. 

Let the pupil monoize the following sentences . 

1. "I, and they are well." 

2. " They, and I were there." 

3. u He, and thou have been ill." 

4. " I, thou, and she were w r alking." 

5. [I had a conversation] (with John:) (and , , , 
, ) ( , his broth er,) 

6. " There was a difficulty (between John.) (and) (his 
brother.") 



128 LEIPOLOGY. 

That is, there was a difficulty (between John,) (and 
there was a difficulty) (between his brother.) 

That this manner of analyzing this sentence, will ap- 
pear to the old school grammarians, contrary to the genius 
of our language, and to common sense, also, is beyond all 
doubt. In what way, they will inquire, could there have 
been a difficulty between one person I " There was a dif- 
ficulty between John, and there ivas a difficulty between his 
brother." » 

This analysis, say they, makes two difficulties out of 
one ! How so ? This method of exegesis, does not make 
two difficulties; it does nothing more than speak of one 
difficulty twice. John, and his brother had a difficulty ; 
and the above presentation of monos, first speaks of this 
one difficulty in relation to John, and secondly, in relation 
to his brother. And did not this one difficulty pertain to 
both ? Where, then, is the impropriety of speaking of it 
in relation to both ? That there is an apparent incongru- 
ity, arising from the use of between with a corm, or noun, 
of the singular numeration, is obvious. But this incon- 
gruity is not chargeable upon the rendering of the sen- 
tence plenary ! This incongruity springs up the moment 
the sentence is presented even in its implenary state. 

" There was a difficulty between John, and between his 
brother." 

This incongruity must be charged to the imperfection 
of our language. This is one of the numerous instances 
in which the subject itself corrects the language employ- 
ed upon it. The following is another case of this kind : 

7. " He, together with his father, went to Boston." 
A very little examination will show that there is the 
same incongruity between the number of he, and the 
meaning of together, which is produced in conjecting be- 
tvieen to John. 

Monoized : [He together went] (to Boston) (with his 
brother.) 

Now, say the old school grammarians, it is good sense, 
and correct English, to say : they went together, And, 
there was a difficulty between them. 



LEIPOLOGY. 129 

But, it is neither good sense, nor correct English, to 
say, John went together, and his brother went together. 
" There was a difficulty between John ; and there was a 
difficulty bettveen his brother." 

There are instances in which the true import of the lan- 
guage used, must be derived from the context of the sen- 
tence, from the nature of the case itself. It is first said, 
that John went together : after, it is expressly said that his 
brother accompanied him. " Together''' requires as many 
as two : this sentence gives as many as tivo. But, says 
the objector, " it does not give two in the same mono." 
It is not necessary that both should be included in the 
same mono : together is satisfied with a plurality even 
though that plurality may be made out by the joint con- 
tribution of different monos." 

In the following, there is the same species of incongru- 
ity of which the objector complains in the preceding : 

[Every man went off] (but John.) 

The pleocorm affirms that every man went away : not 
one remained behind. 

The nepoeclad, however, corrects the false impression 
which the pleocorm, when taken alone, is calculated to 
give. True, the reader must wait for this correction till 
he arrives at the nepoeclad. 

Again. " We, then, as workers together with you, be- 
seech you also, that ye receive not the grace of God in 
vain." 

Now, will that method of analysis, which takes, " ye 
receive not the grace" by itself, as one mono, subject the 
grammarian to the charge of injustice to Paul ? Or, can 
the grammarian be charged with impropriety of solution 
because this one mono when taken by itself, makes Paul 
beseech the Corinthians not to receive the grace. This 
apparent injustice, and the inaccuracy arising from it, is 
entirely removed by the conjective reading of the mono, 
" in vain" 

Again. [" I can do all things] through Christ strength- 
ening me." 

Now, if Paul is to be judged from the pleocorm of his 
sentence, alone, he must be considered a very presumptu- 



130 LEIPOLOGY. 

ous man. But, if the reader will wait till he shall have 
arrived at the dads, Paul will be found not arogant, but 
modest. 

So in the following, the mind must wait till the appa- 
rent incongruity is destroyed by the information afforded 
by those monos which are indeed intended to remove the 
incongruity that one mono by itself often produces : 

1. " John, and his brother went together. " 

2. " There was a difficulty between John, and his 
brother." 

1. [John went together;] (and his brother went togeth- 
er.) 

2. [There was a difficulty] (between John,) (and there 
was a difficulty) (between his brother.) 

[John went (to Boston,) together] (with his brother.) 
[John went together.] 



LESSON XI. 

And so. 

1. What is said of and so? 

2. What is so, in so on ? 

3. So as a monodone is used much in the sense of 
what ? 

4. Is so a monodone when it signifies mode, or state ? 

5. What is so when it signifies the action itself? 

6. Does so ever signify degree ? 

As. 

7. What example illustrates the first comment on as ? 

8. What is the second comment on as ? 

9. What instances are given in illustration of the third, 
and fourth comment ? 

10. Can you supply the no-e-tons in the example which 
illustrates the fifth comment on as ? 

11. In some cases where as signifies manner it may 
give what ? 



LEIPOLOGY. 131 

12. In what way are the poeclads " as appears" " as 
follows" rendered plenary ? 

13. What does as give when it comes before yet, and 
seems to imply, " up to this time ? " 

14. Have you examined the ninth comment on as ? 

15. What does the word, it, represent, as used under this 
comment ? 

16. Have you given close attention to the tenth com- 
ment on as ? 

As-touching. 

17. Is as-touching ever a monodone ? 

18. What does as-touching mean ? 

19. Can you give the substance of the remarks under 
the comment upon as-touching ? 

20. When may tivo words be taken as one part of 
speech ? 

21. Are " accurately ," and " with accuracy " synony- 
mous in meaning ? Are they synonymous in syntax also ? 

As-for. 

22. What is said of as-for ? What example is given 
to illustrate the monodone character of as-for ? 

23. Are as, and for taken as one part of speech in the 
following instance ? 

" Run, as for your life, Charles." 

That is, run as you ivould run for your life. 

24. Is as a monodone when it comes before if, or 
though ? 

25. Is as a monodone where it is a corm ? 

26. When may as be taken as a corm ? 

27. Have you examined what is said upon as, as used 
for which ? 

28. The negative poeclad given by as, is often what ? 

29. What is said of even after the fourteenth comment 
upon as ? 

30. When the superior mono is an implenary poeclad, 
as may give what ? 

31. Is as ever found before the de mi-mono ? 

32. Can as properly come before the demi-mono ? 



132 LEIPOLOGY, 

33. Why cannot as come before the demi-mono ? 

34. What word should be used ? 

35. When that is used, is the construction so changed 
that the demi-mono is destroyed ? 

As -well- as. 
38. In what state are the poeclads which as-well-as 
gives ? 

37. Why is it not necessary to supply inferior monos ? 

38. Does as-well-as ever give a nepoeclad ? 

39. What is as-well-as in the first of the following sen- 
tences ? 

1. "John, as-well-as his brother, writes letters. " 

2. " John wrote letters as well as his brother. " 

THE TEXT. 

And-so. 

1. The poeclad which and so gives, is generally plena- 
ry ; as, John told me to go, and so I went, You called us, 
(and so we have come.) 

2. So in " so on,-' is not a monodone, but a clonoclade ; 
as, We saw apples, peaches, plums, and so on. 

That is, (and we saw other things) (which run so on.) 

So on, or on so signifies that the other things run on in 

the same species, or kind, hence they belong to the same 

class with apples, &c. 

So. 

1. So, as a monodone, is used much in the sense of 
therefore, and generally gives a plenary poeclad ; as, It 
rained very fast, (so I remained) at home. 

2. When so signifies mode, or state, it is not a mono- 
done, but a clonoclade ; as, John reads well, so does his 
brother, Henry is sick, so am I. 

3. So is not a monodone where it signifies the action 
itself, but a corm ; as, John told me to read, and I did so. 
That is, I did it, did this act. 

4. So is not a monodone where it signifies degree, but 
a clonoclade ; as, It is so cold that I must have more 
fire. 



LEIPOLOGY. 133 

. As. 

1. The poeclad which is given by as, in a comparison 
of equality, should be left in the implenary state where 
the plenary would mar the euphony ; as, John writes as 
well as his brother, , 

The first as is not a monodone, but a clonoclade, an ad- 
verb, belonging to well. 

2. The poeclad which is given by as, in a comparison 
of equality, may be rendered plenary where there is no 
action ; as, John is as tall as James is, Henry is as good 
as his brother is. 

Still, the implenary state is something better ; as, Hen- 
ry is as tall as his brother , 

3. When as is used in the sense of " because,'" or "for 
this reason,'''' the poeclad s which it gives, should generally 
be in the plenary state ; as, ("As I could not go) [I sent 
my brother,"] [I could not aid him] (as I had not the 
means.) 

4. The poeclads which as gives in sentences like the 
following, should be plenary : 

"As (with the people) so with the priest." 

It should be : [It is] (with the people) (as it is) (with 
the priest.) 

REMARK. 

When as introduces a poeclad to render " as lo?ig," or 
any similar phrase, definite, the poeclad should be plena- 
ry; as, 

1111 

[" The heir, as long (as he is a child,) differeth] nothing 
from a servant." 

REMARK. 

When as means time, it is not a monodone ; as, 

i 1111 

[As (John returned) he took a seat.] 

When, as, while, then, before, after, where ^ there, here, as 
long, until, &c, never belong to that mono which acts as 
a commentary upon them ; as, 

12 



134 LEIFOLOGY. 

1 11 

[When (the clock struck ten,) I went]- (to church.) 

" When" in itself, is indefinite. Hence this word can- 
not tell at what time I went to church. But, as this word, 
when, is made definite by the mono, " the clock struck ten" 
it becomes abundantly competent to indicate the exact time 
of my going to church. The monos that make these 
words, which in themselves are extremely vague, compe- 
tent to indicate an exact time, or place, are called the 
qualifying monos. " The clock struck ten" is the quali- 
fying mono of " when" in the above case. 

5. As is a corm where it seems to have the sense of 
according to, and is put for ivhich; as, The men, women, 
and children were all lost, as appears from the follow- 
ing. 

6. When as comes before for, where for denotes a 
purpose, an object, a motive, as gives an implenary poe- 
clad ; as, They ran {as , , , ) for their lives. (As 
they ivould run.) 

7. When as has something of the sense of in the same 
ivay, or in the same state, the poeclads which it gives, are 
often implenary ; as, " But, (as , , then,) he that 
was born of the flesh, persecuted him that was born after 
the spirit, so it is now." 

8- In some cases where as signifies manner, it may 
give an implenary poeclad ; as, "Are ye come out (as , 
, , , ) against a thief?" 

That is, in the manner in which you would come out 
against a thief. 

9. The poeclad which as gives in monos like the fol- 
lowing, "As appears, as folloios" &c, are rendered ple- 
nary by supplying it. 

10. When as comes before yet, and seems to imply, "up 
to this time," it gives an implenary poeclad ; as, ("As , 

, , yet,) she has no name." 

That is, ("As the child yet is) [she has no name."] 

That is, as the child is up to this time ; for it is yet, 
not as. that means up to this time. 



LEIP0L0GY. 135 

11. When as stands before a sentence, or a word, which 
is employed for illustrating a principle, a rule, or a de- 
finition, it gives an implenary poeclad : 

A corm is a foundation word in the frame-work of a 
mono : (as, , , , ) ( , , ) ( , 

, , , ) [" There was a man."] 

(As it is seen) (in man) (in the following mono :) 

[There was a man.] 

The word, it, represents "foundation word." 

As it is seen. That is, as foundation word is seen in 

man. 

12. As often gives plenary poeelads, like " it were ;" 
as, " And 1 saw, {as it were,) a sea of glass. [And I 
saw a sea] (of glass,) (as it ivere.) 

The poeclad, " as it were" has the import of the ne- 
poeclad, "in appearance" [And I saw a sea] (of glass) 
(in appearance.) 

The natural construction is the following : 

| And I saw something] (ivhich appeared as if it was a 

sea) (of glass.) 

In this construction, as is not a monodone, but a clono- 

clade, adverb, belonging to appeared. 

13. When as comes before touching, as-touching is a 
monodone ; as, " And, (as touching the dead,) that they rise, 
have ye not read," &c. " And said unto them, Ye men of 
Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do (as 
touching these men.") 

As touching has the sense of concerning, respecting. 
■' Have ye not read as touching the dead." 
That is, concerning the dead. 

REMARKS. 

Two words may be taken as one part of speech, where 
they are used in the exact sense of one other word, pro- 
vided the substitution of the one word for the two, does 
not change the frame-work of the sentence. Where the 
substitution of the one for the two, gives a mono more, or 
a mono less, or changes a poeclad to a ?iepoe-c\ad, or vice 
versa, the two words cannot be taken as one part of speech. 
Hence, with accuracy cannot be taken as one part of 



136 LEIPOLOGY. 

speech, although accurately may be substituted for with 
accuracy, without any change in the sense. For the sub- 
stitution of accuracy for with accuracy, changes the 
frame-work of the sentence ; as, [John writes his copies] 
(with accuracy.) 

The substitution of accurately would reduce the sen- 
tence to one mono ; as, [John writes his copies accu- 
rately.'] 

"With accuracy" and "accurately" are not synonymous 
in syntax : hence one cannot be analyzed like the other. 

14. When as comes before for, as-for is a monodone ; 
as, ("As-for this fellow,) (he is actually unknown to 
me.") 

That is, [I must say, (as-for this fellow) that] (he is 
actually unknown) (to me.) 

That is, I must say concerning, or respecting this 
fellow. 

15. When as comes before if, or though, it is not a 
monodone, but a clonoclade, an adverb, belonging to the 
gnomaclade, or verb, which comes before it ; as, [John 
appears as] (if he is sick.) [You appear as] (though 
you are ill.) 

REMARKS. 

I. As is not a monodone where it is a corm. As may 
be considered a corm when same, such, much or many, is 
found in the mono that is superior to the mono to which 
as belongs ; as, [Henry has such fruit] (as I like.) 

Still, however, if all ellipses should be filled in this, 
and similar constructions, as could not be parsed as a 
corm ; as, [John has such fruit] (as that fruit is) (which 
I like.) 

II. As is a corm where it is improperly used for which; 

i i 

as, [John said nothing] (as (I know) of.) 

[John said nothing] (of which) (I know anything.) 

16. The negative poeclad given by as, is often plenary ; 
as, [" They are not of the world even] (as I am not) of 
the world." 

Even is a clonoclade, belonging to are. They are not 
of the world in the same manner in which I am. 



LEIPOLOGY. 137 

16. In general, the ?*e-poeclads given by as, should be 
plenary; as, "John came (as a prophet.") "We then 
(as workers,) together with you, beseech you that ye 
receive not the grace of God in vain." 

17. When the superior mono is an implenary ^?oe-clad, 
as may give an implenary ?z€-poeclad ; as, " Wherefore ye 
had notice beforehand, that the same might be ready (as 
a matter) of bounty, and not (as , , ) of cove- 
tousness." 

"As" is not unfrequently found before the demi-mono ; 
as, The heat was so intense as to render travelling almost 
impossible. This is a very improper application of as : 
the word which the nature of the proposition requires, is 
" that" The heat was so intense that travelling was 
almost impossible. 

" The heat was so intense" expresses the cause, and the 
effect is that travelling became almost intolerable. But 
as is never employed to indicate an effect. For instance : 
" It rained so fast as I could not attend," is not English. 
And the reason is that, as is never used properly when 
it is put before that mono, or demi-mono, which expresses 
a consequence, an effect. Corrected : It rained so fast that 
I could not attend. 

That is, it rained so fast, the consequence ivas that I 
could not attend. 

N. B. A mono-c\&de, (conjunction) never belongs to 
the demi-mono. 

As-icell-as. 

1. The poeclads which as well as gives, are generally in 
the implenary state ; as, John, (as well as James , 
, ) went. " Have we not power to lead about a 
sister (as well as other apostles , , ? ") " Paul 
(as well as Silas , , ) sang praises to God." 
Paul sang praises to God (as ivell as Silas , , .) 

REMARK. 

It is not necessary to supply the no-e-ton, " to God." 
Those no-e-tons which are superior monos, must be sup- 
plied ; for they are absolutely necessary to sustain the 
inferior monos which are expressed. No inferior mono can 
12* 



138 LEIPOLOGY. 

be conjected to its superior mono unless its superior is in- 
troduced. Hence, when the superior mono is a no-e-ton, 
it must be supplied. Superior monos are never con- 
jected. 

2. When there is but one thing, or but one assemblage 
of things, the name of the thing, or of the assemblage 
of things, should be omitted in the poeclad given by as 
well as ; as, John works (as well as , plays.) 

Henry is good (as ivell as , rich. These books 
are mine (as well as , , yours.) 

REMARKS. 

1. "As well as" never gives a nepoeclad ; nor does it 
ever give a pleocorm. 

2. In the first of the following sentences, as well as is 
a monodone ; — in the second, the last as only, is a mono- 
done : 

1. John, as well as his brother, wrote letters. 

2. John wrote letters as well as his brother. 

In the first, and can be substituted for as well as, in the 
second, it cannot. In the second, as well means so accu- 
rately. 

As- also. 

1. When as also is used as a monodone, the poeclad 
which it gives, must be implenary ; as, John (as also his 
brother , , ) was there. 

Remark. — As also should never be used. 



LESSON XII. 

But. 

1. Can but give an implenary pleocorm ? 

2. In general the pleocorms given by but, should have 
both what ? 

3. Can but give a pleocorm which has no word ex- 
pressed, except but ? 



LEIPOLOGY. 139 

4. Can you give an instance in which but is the only 
expressed word in the pleocorm ? 

5. What should be expressed when but gives a poeclad 
which is not a repetition of the pleocorm, or of a superior 
poeclad ? 

6. What should be expressed when the poeclad, given 
by but, is in the main, a repetition of the pleocorm, or of 
a poeclad ? 

7. What is said of climbeth, and entereth ? 

8. When is but itself omitted ? 

9. When the nature of the case gives the exact event, 
should the word which would express the event, be omit- 
ted, or not ? 

10. Have you given close attention to the sixth com- 
ment upon but ? 

11. Does but ever mean except ? 

12. What does except mean ? 

13. Does but in the sense of except, ever give a pleo- 
corm ? 

14. Does but in the sense of "different from" or " op- 
posit e to" ever give a nepoeclad ? 

15. Does but in the sense of except, give poeclads, or 
nepoeclads, or both ? 

16. When must the mono which is superior to the mo- 
no given by but in the sense of except, contain a negation ? 

17. When has the mono which is superior to the mono, 
given by but in the sense of except, no negation ? 

18. What is meant by " ivhen the thing which is ex- 
cepted," or excluded by but, is not reached by the proposi- 
tion in the superior mono ? 

19. When should the poeclad which but gives in the 
sense of except, have nothing except but, expressed ? 

20. How many examples are given in illustration of 
the ninth comment on but ? 

21. In what state should the nepoeclads which are giv- 
en by but, be ? 

22. When is it sufficient to express the name of the 
thing excluded by but, in the nepoeclad given by but ? 

23. Have you read with great care, the remarks upon 
but and only, at the close of this lesson ? 

24. What does only exclude ? 

25. What does but exclude ? 



140 LEIPOLOGY. 

THE TEXT. 

But, 

1. Some of the pleocorms which but gives, may be im- 
plenary ; but in general, they should have both cordictive 
words expressed ; as, [" But the scripture hath concluded 

11 11 

all , ] (under sin,) [But before (faith came) we ivere 

i i i i 

kept] (under the law,) [But after (that) (faith is come) zee 

l i l 
are no longer] (under a schoolmaster." 

# REMARK. 

In some instances in the pleocorm which but gives, no- 
thing, except but, is expressed ; as, 

Henry is good. [But , , , ] (for what ?) 

2. When the poeclad, given by but, is not a repetition 
of the pleocorm, or of a superior poeclad, both cordictive 
words, if not the entire mono, should be expressed ; as, 

[" I have many things to say] (unto you ;) {but ye can- 
not bear them now") (" If I go not away,) [the Comforter 
will not come] (unto you;) {but (if I depart,) I will send 
him:') 

3. When the poeclad, given by but, is in the main, si 
mere repetition of the pleocorm, or of a poeclad, nothing 
should be expressed, but the words which are not found 
in the pleocorm, or in the poeclad ; as, [John is the broth- 
er] (of James ;) {but , , not , , ) (of Stephen,) 
[" Man shall not live (upon bread) alone ;] {but , , , ) 
(upon every word) (which proceedeth out) (of the mouth) 

11 l 

(of God,") [He (that entereth (into the sheep-fold,) not) 
(by the door ;) (but , climbeth up) (some other way,) 
is a thief.] 

REMARKS. 

" Climbeth" is expressed in the poeclad given by but, 
because " climbeth" is not a mere repetition of " entereth" 



LEIPOLOGY. 141 

found in the poeclad, of which, " hut climheth up," is a 
partial imitation. " Entereth" is the genus, and " climb- 
eth" the species. Did not the writer wish to point out a 
more special way of entering into the sheep-fold, in the 
second poeclad, than he has in the first, the second would 
read as follows : " He [that entereth (into the sheep-fold) 
?iot) (by the door,) (but , , ) (by some other way,) 
is a thief. 

That is, (but that entereth) by, &c. " Up" however, 
is not found in the poeclad after which (" but climheth up") 
is modelled. And, as " up" would not coalesce with en- 
tereth in sense, climheth is substituted for entereth, or the 
species for the genus, the particular for the general. 

4. When the poeclad given by but, breaks its (poeclad's) 
superior mono, but itself should be omitted; as, "God, 
( , not man , , , ) is the ruler of this uni- 
verse." 

[God is the ruler] (of this universe;) (but man is not 
the ruler.) 

5. In some instances where the nature of the case gives 
the exact event, the word which would express the event, 
should be omitted ; as, " It is impossible but that offences 
will come ; (but wo , , ) (unto him through 
whom they come.") 

That is, wo shall come, or wo shall be, or wo is unto 
him. 

6. When the pleocorm given by but, is broken by a 
poeclad, the antithetical poeclad, given by but, should also 
be broken by a repetition of the same poeclad which breaks 
the pleocorm ; as, [" But he (who ivas) (of the bond-wo- 
man,) was born] (after the flesh ;) (but he (who was) (of 
the free-woman,) was) (by promise.") 

In the translation, the poeclad, "who was" which here 
breaks the poeclad, given by but, is omitted : ( u but he (of 
the free-woman) was) by promise.") 

REMARKS. 

1. But, in the sense of except, never gives a pleocorm. 



142 LEIPOLOGY. 

2. But, in the sense of " different from" or " opposite 
to" never gives nepoeclads. 

3. But, in the sense of except, generally gives nepoe- 
clads. 

7. Where the thing which is excepted, excluded, by but, 
is the only one which the proposition in the superior 
mono, reaches, the superior mono must contain a negation 
expressed, or implied ; as, 

[" John eat nothing] (btct an apple") 

Here, the apple, the very thing which is excluded, is 
the only thing which John eat. 

8. When the thing, excepted, excluded, by but, is not 
reached by the proposition in the superior mono, the su- 
perior mono has no negation; as, 

[John eat everything] {but an apple.) 

Here the very thing which is excepted, excluded, by 
but, is the only thing which John did not eat ! 

9. Where but means except, the poeclad which it gives, 
should have nothing expressed except but ; as, 

" He hath not grieved me (but , , , , ) in part." 

That is, he hath not grieved me at all, (except he hath 
grieved me) in part. 

That is, if the fact that he hath grieved me in part, is 
taken away, removed, rejected, then he hath not grieved 
me at all. (See page 101.) 

" Man (but , , ) for this, were active to no end." 

That is, man were active to no end, (except it were) for 
this. 

" Where can the sinner go, (but , , , ) to Christ?" 

That is, if you except, reject, remove, that the sinner 
can go to Christ, he can go to no one, to no place, for sal- 
vation. 

" In what does true piety consist, (but , , ) in a 
hearty resignation to the will of God, in all things ? " 



LEIPOLOGY. 143 

That is, in what does true piety consist, {except it con- 
sists) in a hearty resignation to the will of God, in all 
things. In other words, True piety consists in nothing at 
all, if you except, reject, throw out, that it consists in a 
hearty resignation to the will of God, in all things. (See 
p. 101.) 

[" No man cometh to the Father,] {but , , ) (by 

me.") 

That is, but, or except he cometh by me. 

10. In some cases the paraclade, to, should not be ex- 
pressed in the demi-mono which follows the implenary 
poeclad given by but in the sense of except ; as, 

" Jones has done nothing this week {but , , ) , 
play." 

[Jones has done nothing] {during this week) (except 
it is to play.) 

11. The nepoeclads which are given by but, should be 
plenary, or nearly so ; as, 

All the boys w r ent {but James,) "All eyes were dry (but 
mine , .") " It is impossible, {but that) offences will 
come.' 1 (p. 101.) 

" That," here is a corm, representing the mono which 
follows it, " offences will come." 

12. When the thing excluded by but, is reached by the 
superior mono, and belongs to the same class with the 
second thing in the superior mono, it is sufficient to express 
the name of the. second, in the nepoeclad given by but ; 
as, [John has , , ] {but one son.) 

Here, the son that is excluded by but, is reached by the 
superior mono, and belongs to the same class with the 
second thing in the superior mono, namely, son, under- 
stood. 

Hence it is not necessary to express the word, son, in 
both monos ; as, [John has no son] (but one son.) 

[John has purchased , , ] (but one book.) 



144 LEIP0L0GY. 

Now, book in the nepoeclad, indicates what words should 
be supplied in the pleocorm. 

REMARKS. 

But, and only. 

These words, but, and only, often produce the same ef- 
fect ; hence the old school grammarians consider them the 
same part of speech. These words, however, differ in 
their frame-work connection with other words ; and, con- 
sequently, in the objects on which they exert an influence 
in producing the common result, viz., exclusion. There- 
fore they cannot belong to the same syntax class of words. 
That but, and only are much the same in many instances 
in ep-e-dei-col-o-gy, is obvious. Both words convey the 
general idea of exclusion, exception, subtraction. 

1. " John has only one son." 

2. "John has but one son." 

3. " John has only three sons." 

4. " John has but three sons." 

Only excludes those things which are not mentioned in 
the sentence ; whereas, but excludes those which are men- 
tioned in the sentence. 

The son, mentioned in the first sentence, is not exclud- 
ed by only : it is the province of only to exclude all sons 
from John, except this one son who is mentioned in this 
sentence. It is the province of but, not to exclude those 
sons who are not mentioned in the second sentence, but 
to exclude the very son who is mentioned in this sentence : 

[" John has no son] (but one son.") 

Here the son mentioned in the nepoeclad, is excepted, 
excluded, to place him beyond the negative proposition in 
the pleocorm. So in the following, but introduces an ex- 
ception, an exclusion, to prevent the proposition in the 
pleocorm, from including him who is mentioned in the ne- 
poeclad : 

["All the boys went] (but James.") 

Here, James is excluded, taken out of the reach of the 



LEIPOLOGY. 145 

pleocorm, by the exception made by but. And, in the 
same way in which James is here excluded, taken out of 
the reach of the pleocorm, "All the boys went," the son, 
mentioned in the nepoeclad of the following sentence, is 
excluded, placed by but, out of the reach of the negative 
pleocorm : 

[John has no son] {but one.) 

John has no son. " But" however, puts in the exception, 
" but one son." And, as this exception saves one son from 
the reach of the negative proposition in the pleocorm, it 
follows that John has one son in despite of this negative 
proposition. 

To see that only and but differ very considerably one 
from the other, it may be well to examine them in the fol- 
lowing sentences : 

1. " John has only one son. 5 ' 

2. " John has but one son." 

1. John has no son only one. 

2. John has no son but one. 

Again. 

1. " John has an only son." 

2. " John has a son." 

3. " Only John has a son." 

4. " John, only has a son." 

5. John has sons only. 

In each of these instances, only excludes — but only does 
not exclude anything which is mentioned in the sentence 
in which only stands. " But," however, excludes the very 
thing that is mentioned in the mono which it gives : 

1. "All went but John." 

2. " James has taken everything but the book." 

3. " Henry has no son but this boy." 

4. Jones has done nothing to-day but play. 

1. " John has an only son." 

Only is a metaclade, belonging to son. Yet, only does 
not exclude this son — though it excludes all other sons. 

2. "John has a son." 

13 



146 LEIPOLOGY. 

True : and he may have ten sons : this sentence does 
not exclude the idea that he has not more sons than one. 

3. " Only John has a son." 

Only, here, is a metaclade, and excludes all persons 
but John, from the possession of sons. 

4. " John, only has a son." 

Only is here a clonoclo.de, belonging to has ; and ex- 
cludes all acts, all deeds, hut that denoted by has, from 
John, in relation to his son. John, only has his son : 
that is, John does nothing in relation to his son, but 
possess him. John does not clothe his son : he does not 
educate him : John, only has him. 

5. " John has sons only" 

Only, here, is a metaclade, an adjective, belonging to 
sons. It is the province of only, in this instance, to 
exclude all daughters from the possession of John. 

Observe. — The following sentences are not English : 

1. "All the boys went only James." 

2. " I called all the girls only Laurein." 

3. "All the girls have come e>?zZ?/Laurmda." 

4. '■ The girls have all read only Me-ril-la." 

But should be substituted for only. (See Part II.) 

Observe. — The words which are understood in the 
pleocorm, or poeclad, when but is employed, are not 
understood when only is used ; as, 

1. [John has , , ] (but one son.) 

2. [John has only one son.] 

Indeed, when only is used, the superior mono, whether 
pleocorm or poeclad, should have no negative ; as, He 
hath not grieved me but in part." 

3. He hath grieved me only in part. 

1. There is but one mono in the following : 
[" Henry has only one book."] 

2. There are two monos in the following : 
["Henry has , , ] (but one book.") 



LEIPOLOGY. 147 



LESSON XIII. 

Except, Than. 

1. When is except a monoclone ? 

2. Have you examined the instances which illustrate 
except, and excepting, as monodones ? 

3. Have you paid close attention to what is said of the 
state of the m.onos, given by than ? 

4. What is said of " than whom ?" 

5. For what should whom be exchanged ? 

THE TEXT. 

1. Except, and excepting are monodes where but can 
be substituted for them ; as, Take all the books except, or 
excepting that. But that. 

2. Except, and excepting may give poeclads and nepoe- 
dads ; but not pleocorms. 

3. When a mere thing, or a mere individual, is ex- 
cluded, except, and excepting give nepoeclads ; as, I have 
no book except the Bible. Henry has no daughter except- 
ing Jane. James makes no charge against Stephen 
{except that) he is idle. I have no excuse to offer {except 
that , ) of necessity. 

4. When except, and excepting exclude certain things 
from an expressed, or from an implied negation, as the 
condition on which something can be accomplished, these 
words give poeclads.; as, " Now, how is any man to learn 
the will of his Maker {except , , , ) from 
the Bible ? " (" Except ye repent^) ye shall all likewise 
perish." 

Than. 

1. Than never gives any mono, excepting poeclads. 

2. In general, the poeclads given by than, should be 
left in the implenary state ; as, " Joseph was older {than 
John , .") 

3. When the poeclad, given by than, falls before the 
demi-mono, nothing but than should be expressed ; as, 
<; John knew better {than , , , ) to do it." 



148 LEIPOLOGY. 

That is, John knew better than it was good for him to 
do it. 

" This apple is better than that apple." 

Than that apple is what ? Than that apple is good. 

Good, however, need not be considered a no-e-ton, for 
it is not necessary to enable the pupil to analyze the other 
words in the mono. 

1. It is better for him to return (than , , ) 
( , , ) to remain here. 

2. " It is more congenial to health, to exercise, (than 

) ( , , , ) t0 study." 

3. u It is better to suffer wrong (than , , ) 
( , , , ) to do wrong." 

That is, [it is better] (for a person to suffer wrong) 
(than it is) (for a person to do wrong.) 

4. When the corm can be inferred from the superior 
mono, it should be omitted in the poeclad given by than ; 
as, " John would sooner go (than , , not.") 

5. When the omission of the cordictive words would 
produce ambiguity in the poeclad given by than, they 
should be expressed ; as, James loves John better (than 
Stephen.) 

This may mean that, James loves John better than he 
loves Stephen; and it may mean that, James loves John 
better than Stephen loves him. To render the exact 
sense obvious, the poeclad, given by than, must not be so 
implenary ; as, James loves John better (than Stephen 
does. 

If the sense is that James loves one more than the 
other, James should be repeated through the proxycorm, 
he; as, James loves John better (than he does Stephen.) 

REMARKS. 

Whom, after than, should be rejected as grossly bad 
English : " I saw Johnson daily, than whom,, no man en- 
tertained me better." 

" I saw Johnson daily ; and no man entertained me better 
than he." 

He, or ivho should be put for whom ; if who, the mono 
given by than, should not close the sentence ; as, I saw 



LEIPOLOGY. 149 

that gentleman often ; than icho, no man ever treated me 
better. 

But he is the better substitute for ivho. 

6. When no obscurity is produced by the omission of 
the nepoeclad which contains the subject of the gnoma- 
clade, or verb, in the demi-mono, this clad should be 
omitted ; as, 

1. [It is better] ( , , , to suffer wrong 
than , , 5 to do wrong. 

2. [It is easier] ( , , , to ride) (than 

, , *';"•'"» to walk.) 

[It is better] ( for a person to suffer wrong) (than , 
, ) {for him to do wrong.") 

What are the true noetons of the following : 

(In order) ( , , , to be a grammarian,) 

[he must think.] 



LESSON XIV. 

Seeing, If For, " To be sure" No, Even. 

1. Seeing never gives a pleocorm, nor a nepoeclad. 

2. The poeclad, given by seeing, must be plenary, or 
nearly so : as, u Now, I am sure the Lord will do me 
good, (seeing I have a Levite) for my priest." 

if- 

1. If, rarely, if ever, gives a pleocorm; it never gives 
a nepoeclad. 

2. The poeclad, given by if, may be more or less ple- 
nary, according to circumstances. In some instances, it is 
not necessary to express either of the cordictive words : 

1. " I shall return if I can , .") 

2. It is said that he is a good man ; (if , , 
so,) his deeds will show it. 

3. " Johnson will return, (if he gets my letter) in 

13* 



150 LEIP0L0GY. 



For. 



For may give a pleocorm, a poeclad, and a nepoeclad. 

1. When for is the j£rs£ word in a /wZZ, a complete , 
period, it gives the pleocorm ; as, [" For aZZ ?Ae Zaw w 
fulfilled'] in one word, even in this, Thou shalt love thy 
neighbor as thyself." 

2. Generally, the poeclads which are given by for, 
should be plenary, or nearly so ; as, 

1. "From henceforth, let no man trouble me; (for I 
bear the marks) of the Lord in my body." 

2. " Be not deceived ; (for whatsoever , ) a man 
soweth) that shall he reap." 

3. He shall glorify me ; (for he shall receive , ) of 
mine. 

4. " I pray for them ; I pray not for the world ; but for 
them which thou hast given me ; (for they are thine 

•") 

3. The nepoeclads given by for expressed, should be 
plenary, or nearly so ; as, " I pray for them ; I pray not 
(for the world ;) but, (for those , ) which thou hast 
given me ; for they are thine. 

4. When the nepoeclad, given by for, is founded on the 
receiver, and breaks the superior mono, for itself is omit- 
ted ; as, 

1. [Get ( , me) some paper,] Jane. 

2. [Father has purchased ( , John) a knife.] 

3. " For he loveth our nation ; and he hath built ( , 
tis) a synagogue." 

REMARK. 

When the superior mono is not broken, for should be 
expressed ; as, He hath built a synagogue (for us.) 

o. Generally, when the nepoeclad, given by for, is 
founded upon time, number of times, or space, for itself 
should be omitted ; as, 

" Henry had been walking (. , an hour,") " Me-ril-la 
has been reading ( , a long time,") " Go, and wash 
( , seven times.") 



LEIPOLOGY. 151 

(" , Nine times) the space that measures day, and night 
To mortal men, he, with his horrid crew, 
Lay vanquished, rolling in the fiery gulf." 

He certainly rolled ( , a long time,) and ( , a long 
distance.) 

6. When the demi-mono expresses a purpose, a motive, 
an object, for itself, the well-known harbinger of a pur- 
pose, an object, an incentive, should be omitted ; as, 

" What went ye out ( , to see ?") 

REMARKS. 

The demimono so generally expresses that act, or deed, 
which produces the purpose, object, or incentive, that 
the omission of for, produces no ambiguity. 

"To see,'''' is a demi-mono ; but "for to see," is a whole 
mono — "for to see, 11 is a nepoeclad. " To see," is the 
demi-mono cormified by the introduction of for — hence 
" to see," is a corm — and for is a steroclade, a preposition, 
belonging to the cormified demi-mono, " to see." 

1. "I told him ( , to go.") 

2. "He asked me ( , to read the letter.") 

1. Did I command him without a purpose for doing it? 
No. " To go," expresses the act which I wished him to 
do ; and for, understood, indicates that this very act is 
the object for which I commanded him : I told him for 
— but for what did I tell him ? for to go. 

2. He asked me ( , to read the letter") 

He asked me — but for what purpose did he ask me ? 
for to read the letter. 

" To be sure." 

The demimono, to be sure, is very common to be sure ; 
and it is as improper to be sure, as it is common ! 

1. " Has the clock been repaired?" " To be sure !" 

2. " Has Charles come with the paper ? " " To be sure 
he has." 

This demimono is not confined to the common people. 



152 LEIPOLOGY. 

Is it not something singular that " to be sure" should be 
substituted for surely : the erroneous prolix for the proper 
laconic ? That we should fall into error from an over- 
anxiety to be brief, is nothing singular; but to reject the 
right for the wrong, at the sacrifice of despatch, is eccen- 
tric indeed. 

No. 

1. No is a monodone where it is used much in the sense 
of nay, where nay means, " not only so, but more;" as, 

" No man could bind him — (no ,. , not , even) 
with chains." 

That is, no man could bind him — (no, or nay, he could 
not bind him even) with chains. 

The second no is not a negative, but an affirmative. 

REMARKS. 

When no is the only expressed word in an answer to a 
question, it is not a monodone, but a clonoclade ; as, 

" Did you go to the city last week? " [" , , no."] 

In this relation the t is omitted ; not becomes no. 
When the mono is rendered plenary, no itself should be 
rendered plenary ; as, 

" Did you go to the city last week?" [" I did wot"] 

"Even. 

'Even is rarely, if ever a monodone. It is often the first 
word in a mono ; as, " Lo, I am with you always; ( , 
, even) unto the end of the world." 

That is, I am even, I continue even up to the end with 
vou. Even is a clonoclade, belonging to am. 



LESSON XV. 

1 . Have you examined this lesson with care ? 

2. When is that a corm ? 

3. When is for understood before that ? When is of? 



LEIPOLOGY. 153 

4 When is " the consequence is, or was, or has been,' 11 
understood before that ? 

5. When is " which is " understood before that ? 

THE TEXT. 

1. That is never a monodone. 

2. That is a corm where it is used as the representative 
of one, or more, monos which follow it ; as, " That man is 
mortal, has never been denied," " I have heard that the 
Greeks defeated the Turks." 

1. What has never been denied ? That has never been 
denied. What is it which infuses a distinct meaning into 
that ? " Man is mortal." 

2. I have heard what ? that. What does that repre- 
sent ? "the Greeks defeated the Turks." 

That, in all similar instances, is called a conjunction by 
the old school grammarians. Hence that in the following, 
is a conjunction : 

"And it came to pass that Jesus himself drew near." 

The word, it, is called a pronoun, representing the 
monos, " Jesus himself drew near." 

And, as that represents the same monos, why is not that 
a pronoun ? It came to pass. What came to pass ? why, 
that came to pass. 

3. That is a corm where it is used in the relation of 
who, and which ; as, This is the lad that wishes to learn 
English syntax, This is the book that he needs — who 
wishes — which he needs. 

REMARK. 

That is always a corm where its frame-work rank will 
not allow of the substitution of the; as, "Now, I know 
that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Leviie for 
my priest." The, here, cannot be substituted for that. 

REMARK. 

Of, for, " which is," " the consequence is" save, in, it, 
on, "it happens" may have something to do with that when 



154 LEIPOLOGY. 

that is a corm where the old school grammarians call it 
a conjunction. 

4. When that comes before monos which denote a pur- 
pose, some object in view, or some inducement for a certain 
measure, for is understood before it ; as, 

1. " Then w^ere brought unto him little children ( , 
that) he should put his hands on them, and pray." 

For what were the little children brought ? That he 
might put his hands on them and pray. Ah ! were they 
brought for that ? Yes, they were brought for that. 

2. " For a good work, we stone thee not, but for blas- 
phemy, and, (because , that) thou makest thyself God." 

5. When that, as the proxy of a mono, follows glad, 
confident, persuaded, assure, certain, &c, of is the true 
noeton ; as, " Paul was glad ( , that) Titus had 
come." 

6. When that, as the proxy of a mono, follows deter- 
mined, resolved, &c, on is the true noeton ; as, " They 
resolved ( , that} he should pay the demand." 

7. Where that comes before monos which express a 
result, an effect, a consequence, " the consequence was," is 
understood ; as, " He was so ill ( , , , that) he could 
not return," " Nature has so exquisitely modelled the hu- 
man features ( , , , that) they are capable of the 
expression of the most secret emotions of the soul." 

8. When that is used much in the sense of viz., and is 
not synonymous with " it" " which is," is the noeton ; as, 

"And he spake a parable unto them to this end, ( , 
, that) men ought always to pray, and not faint. 

REMARKS. 

There is some advantage, and much beauty, in the use 
of that in those constructions in which the old school 
grammarians call it a conjunction, but in which the new, 
denominate it a proxy corm. In all these cases, that is a 
precursor — it informs the mind in advance, that something 
is soon to follow of some moment ; as, " Now, we know 
that, at this moment, the Savior of the world was horn." 

The use of that is not the only instance in which our 



LEIPOLOGY. 155 

language sends out harbingers to herald in, and fix the 
mind upon, the important parts of the proposition. Here, 
there, and various other words, hold this prophetic rank. 

" There is, then, no condemnation." But, ivhere, says 
the mind, is there no condemnation ? There is no con- 
demnation to them — who are in Christ Jesus. 

In the same beautiful way do many of the monodones 
herald in causes, consequences, conclusions, &c. 

1. " For to be carnally minded, is death ; because the 
carnal mind is enmity against God." 

2. " For he, that in these things, serveth Christ, is ac- 
ceptable to God, and approved of men. " Therefore, let us 
follow after the things which make for peace." 

REMARKS. 

Where that falls after " in order" for is understood 
before that ; as, I jumped out in order ( , that) I 
might aid my son. 

This is not good : the mono, " in order" or the mono, 
1 for that," should be omitted ; as, I jumped out in order 
to aid my son. Or, I jumped out thai I might aid my 
son. The omission of either mono, rids the sentence of 
the pleonasm which now mars it. 

Supply the noetons in the following : 

11 122 2 3 3 34 

" It was nearly at the moment , , , , 

4 4 5 556666 

, that Augustus Caesar had, for a third time, 

57 7 888 777 5 

since the foundation of the city , , , shut 

5 5 9 9 10 10 11 u 11 12 

the temple of Janus, in token of the prevalence of 

12 12 1 13 13 14 14 14 13 13 

universal peace, that the Savior of the world, was born." 

11 2 2 1 3 4 1 

" I beseech , you, therefore, brethren, by the 

4 55166 66 77 

mercies of God, that ye present your bodies , a 

7 7 7 7 8899 

living sacrifice, holy, acceptable, unto God, which is 

9 9 9 

your reasonable service." 



156 LEIPOLOGY. 



LES SON XVI. 

After ) Before, Notwithstanding. 

1. When is after a monodone ? 

2. When is before a monodone ? 

3. When are the monos to which after, and before, 
belong, nepoeclads ? 

4. What is said of notwithstanding ? 

THE TEXT. 

After is a monodone where it does not mean time. 
After gives nepoeclads only, which should be plenary, or 
nearly so ; as, 

1. " He was called after his uncle." 

2. " He made this machine after that model." 

3. " Have you come after your book ? " 

4. " Ye shall not go after other Gods." 

5. " They judge after the sight." 

6. " Can you drink [after me ?") 

That is, can you drink from the same glass from which 
I have drunk, without first cleansing it? 

If after, in the sixth instance, signified time, it would 
not be a monodone, but a clonoclade. Nor would the 
mono, " after me," be correct English : it would then be, 
("after I , , , .") 

[" Can you drink after] I shall have drunk ? " 
• When after signifies time, it is not a steroclade, not a 
preposition, but a clonoclade, an adverb, belonging to the 
gnomaclade, or verb, in the superior mono ; as, 
l l i 

[After (these things were ended,) Paul purposed (in 
1 1 2 

the spirit,) to go] to Jerusalem, saying, after I have been 

2 2 2 2 2 

there, I must also see Rome. 

1. Paul purposed after to go. 

2. (I must also see Rome after.) (Seepage 133.) 

Before. 

When before does not mean time, it is a monodone, 
and gives nothing but nepoeclads; as, 



LEIPOLOGY. 157 

1. "He stood before his desk." 

2. " He was not behind, but before me." 

3. " Wherewithal shall I come before the Lord?" 

4. " The world was all before them." 

5. " And he set Ephraim before Manasseh." 

6. " He esteemed virtue before gold." 

(Part III, page 20.) 

REMARKS. 

After, and before, are often improperly used, even by 
good writers : 

" He that cometh (after me,) is preferred before me ; 
for he was (before me.") 

The syntax of this verse is not correct. The word, 
after, denotes time, and is a clonoclade, not a steroclade, 
not a preposition. In the second instance, the word, 
before, means time, and is a clonoclade, not a steroclade. 
The proxy corm, me, then, should give place to I : 

[He (that cometh after) (I come.) is preferred] (before 
me;) (for he was before) (I was.) 

When before means place, preference, or superiority, it 
is a steroclade ; in other instances it is a clonoclade. 

When after, and before, signify time, the poeclads 
which follow them, maybe left in the implenary state ; as, 

1. [" Now, after (two days , , ) he departed 
thence,] (and , went) (into Galilee.") 

2. ["After (these things , , ) Jesus iveni] 
over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias." 

3. ["After (these things , , , ) Jesus 
ivalked] in Galilee." 

4. [" Then Jesus (six days) before (the passover , 
, , ) came] to Bethany." 

In all instances like these, the old school grammarians 
parse after, and before, as prepositions, steroclades. Yet, 
in every instance where the poeclad is plenary, they parse 
after, and before, as adverbs, clonoclades : 

1. [" After (these things were e?ided ) Paul purposed] in 
the spirit, &c." 

But, although they call after, in this case, by the proper 
name, they uniformly conject it to the wrong gnoma- 
14 



158 LEIPOLOGY. 

clade, or verb : they say that after is an adverb, belonging 
to were ended ! Hence this clonoclade is said to qualify 
the very words which actually qualify it ! " Were ended" 
renders after definite, that after may point out the time of 
PauPs purposing. (See page 133.) 

Observe. — " He began after he" is English. But, " he 
commenced before him" " I began after her" is not 
English, but custom. 

The pupil should be permitted, however, to follow cus- 
tom in speaking, and writing. But, that he may know 
what the syntax genius of the language is, which, in many 
cases, is totally disregarded by custom, he should care- 
fully correct the numerous errors which were originally 
committed through ignorance, and afterwards confirmed 
by habit. 



LESSON XVII. 

Provided, Lest, Notwithstanding, and Save. 

1. Is provided always a monodone ? 

2. Does provided ever give a pleocorm ? 

3. Does provided ever give a poeclad ? 

4. Does provided ever give any mono but a poeclad ? 

5. Does that ever follow provided by an ellipsis ? 

6. "What is the legitimate noeton of the ellipsis which 
comes after provided, when that follows provided. ? 

7. What is said of lest ? 

8. Does that ever follow lest ? 

9. Is the mono which lest gives, when that follows it y 
plenary, or implenary ? 

10. Does lest ever give pleocorms ? 

11. Does lest ever give nepoeclads? 

12. What is said of notioithstanding^ 

13. Does notwithstanding ever give pleocorms ? 

14. Does notwithstanding ever give nepoeclads ? 

15. Are the poeclads, given by notwithstanding, plenary, 
or implenary ? 



LEIPOLOGY. 159 

16. Is notwithstanding always a monoclone ? (Yes, and 
of the first class.) 

17. What is said of save ? 



THE TEXT. 

Provided, Lest, Notivithstanding, Save. 

1. Provided is a monodone where it introduces a 
poeclad as a condition, a provision; as, " I shall go 

! 1111 

provided you do not return) next spring." 

2. When that does not follow provided, the poeclad, 
given by provided, must be plenary, or nearly so ; as, I 
shall purchase the house {provided I like it.) I shall 
purchase the house (provided you do not , , .") 

3. When that follows provided, the poeclad which 
provided gives, is always implenary : even both cordictive 
words are noetons ; as, " I shall go (provided , , 
that) you do not return in the spring." 

That is, (provided it happens that.) 

Lest. 

1. Lest gives nothing but poeclads, which, with one 
exception, should always be plenary, or nearly so ; as, " I 
will repeat my illustrations of these principles, (lest the 
audience should not understand them.") ("Lest the audi- 
ence should not understand , , ) I will repeat 
my illustrations." 

EXCEPTION. 

2. When lest is followed by that, the poeclad which it 
gives, is always implenary ; even both cordictive words 
are omitted ; as, " I do not wish to promise (lest , 

, , that) 1 could not fulfil my engagement." 

That is, (lest it should happen that) I could not fulfil, &c. 

Notivithstanding. 

1. Notwithstanding is always a monodone, and gives 
nothing but poeclads in which there must be one of the 
two cordictive words, expressed ; as, I shall return, (not- 
withstanding the bad roads , )( , . ."j 



160 LEIPOLOGY. 

That is, I shall return (notwithstanding the bad roads 
are) against me.) 

2. Sometimes the poeclad, given by notwithstanding ', is 
so constructed, that both cordictive words are expressed; 
as, I shall return {notwithstanding the roads are bad.) 

REMARKS. 

It is of some importance that the true syntax relation 
of " notwithstanding" should be much better understood. 
The following is the first sentence in the Preface of 
Greenleaf s Grammar : 

" Notioithstanding the numerous publications upon 
English grammar ', and the ability with which many of 
them are written, it is a fact, ivhich I believe few will 
deny, that this science has never been so simplified, as to 
render the study of it at once concise, easy and inviting" 

" Notwithstanding the numerous publications upon 
English grammar," &c. 

In this instance, both cordictive words should be ex- 
pressed. 

Notwithstanding the publications on English grammar, 
are numerous. 

As the sentence stands, it is impossible to supply the 
noeton, are ; hence publications cannot be parsed. 

The word, ability, is also deprived of its case : 

" Notwithstanding the numerous publications on Eng- 
lish grammar, and the ability with which many of them 
are written." 

Notwithstanding the publications are numerous, 

l l i 
{and the ability (with which many of them are written, 
l l l 

, highly respectable}) it is a fact, &c. 

In a work, entitled " Johnsorts English Dictionary, as 
improved by Todd," &c, I have found the following ac- 
count of " notwithstanding : " 

" Notwithstanding, not-with-stand-ing, conj. [This 
word is properly a participial adjective, as it is com- 
pounded of not and withstanding, and answers exactly to 
the Latin non obstante,] ivithout hindrance or obstruction 
from." 



LEIPOLOGY. 



161 



The reason which is here offered for calling " notwith- 
standing" a participial adjective, is not sound ; and the 
position with respect to the meaning- of " notwithstand- 
ing" is without the least plausibility. Indeed, the sig- 
nification of this word is the very reverse of that which 
is presented in the above quotation : for, instead of denot- 
ing that there is no obstruction, it always indicates that 
there is an obstruction, and implies that it may be over- 
come or removed ; as, He will return notwithstanding 
your commands, He will pay his debts notwithstanding 
his poverty, I shall go notwithstanding I am sick. 

That is, although your commands may obstruct, yet I 
shall return ; although his poverty produces a great ob 
struction to the paying of his debts, yet he will pay them ; 
although my illness is an obstacle to my being there, yet 
I shall go. 

Save. 

1. Save, generally, if not always, gives nepoeclads 
which should be plenary, or nearly so ; as, 

"And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jeru- 
salem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there, 
{save that) the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, say- 
ing that bonds, and afflictions abide me." 

" They all went {save John.") 

That is, save, except, or but, John from the others ! Yes, 
but him — for but is happily illustrated in this grossly im- 
proper application of it : this use of but is not a syllepsis. 



LESSON XVIII 



REMARKS. 

All who have written English Grammars have found 
words, in accurately formed sentences, which they have not 
been able to parse according to any principles laid down 
in their books. They have denominated these words ano- 

14* 



162 LEIPOLOGY. 

malies, and idioms. Whether these words are thus de- 
graded to shield the Grammars, or to teach the syntax 
philosophy of the words themselves, is quite unimportant 
But, as an anomaly is an irregularity, or a deviation from 
fixed principles, it may turn out that the Grammars them- 
selves are anomalies ! That they are deviations from the 
fixed principles of the English language, is a truth which 
no one who examines the subject, can doubt for a moment. 
These Grammars, however, are not idioms ; for an idiom 
is something peculiar to a language ; but these works are 
not peculiar to any language, nor common to all : they 
are inconsistent with the constructive genius of language. 
Mr. Kirkham remarks, in his Pittsburg edition, in relation 
to these words, as follows : — " Thus I have taken a slight 
glance at the different views of grammarians, in relation 
to these words and phrases — and, since I am not disposed 
to agree with any of them, perhaps it may be demanded 
in what manner /would parse these examples myself. 
An answer is at hand. I would not parse them at all ! " 

Now, this is a very candid confession of an inability to 
parse them. Thus they parse the language by passing it 
by as idioms, eccentricities, and anomalies ! 

FROM HUBBARD'S ENGLISH GRAMMAR. 

1. " What have I to do with thee ?" 

2. " What have you to say ? " 

3. " I have a book to read" 

" It is sometimes difficult," says the author, " to tell what 
the object of the verb is, or whether it has any object at 
all ! " 

" Should the ingenious student ask for the objects of to 
do, to say, to read, &c, we reply that thev have no ob- 
jects!!" 

In this, however, Mr. Hubbard is as far from the truth 
as is the learned Mr. Kirkham, who defines rain to be a 
state of things ! ! 

Every verb which is transitive in its nature, must be 
transitive in its construction in relation to other words. 
To say, to do, and to read, are transitive verbs wherever 
they are used in the active voice. To do is to do some- 



LEIPOLOGY. 163, 

thing — to say is to say something, and to read is to read 
something — for no one can do, say, or read, without doing, 
saying, or reading something. And this something, be it 
what it may, is the object of the verb. 

1. " I have a book to ready That is, I have a book 
which to read. Or, I have a book to read it. "I have a 
book " — for what ? Why, to read it ! 

2. " What have I to do with thee ?" That is, Have I 
any thing or act, now in view, which I am about to do 
with thee ? Which, understood, then, is the object of do. 

3. " What have you to say ? " That is, what have you, 
which you desire to say. 

STATED THUS : 

1. [" What , have I , to do] (with 
thee?"] 

2. [" What , have you , to say ? "] 

3. [" I have a book , to read."] 

FILLED UP THUS : 

1. ["What thing have I {which to do)] (with thee?") 

2. [" What thing have you (which to say ? ")] 

3. [" I have a book (ivhich to read.")] 

But I may be told that the insertion of these words, is 
prejudicial to the music of the language. This I grant, 
of course ! And I add that there is no word that is 
understood, which, when expressed, does not injure the 
euphony of the sentence. 

To, For, In, With, Of, Concerning, About, During, 
and Through. 

These monodones are not unfrequently noetons in the 
very nepoeclads which they themselves give : 

To. 

1. When the name of the receiver breaks the superior 
mono, to itself should not be expressed in the nepoe- 
ciad which it gives ; as, 

" James gave ( , Charles) a book." 

2. When the name of the receiver, does not break the 
superior mono, to should be expressed ; as, 

" James gave a book (to Charles.") 



164 LEIPOLOGY. 



REMARK. 



To, when a paraclade, should not be expressed in the 
demi-mono, when the mono to which the demi-mono 
stands conjected, has bid, dare, make, see, help, hear, feel, 
let, need, or have ; as, 

" I will let John , write the copies." 

That is, to write the copies. (See p. 53.) 

In speaking of the use of to as the first word in the de- 
mi-mono, I have said that it is employed to prevent a 
command, and a petition. In a few instances, however, 
the use of to, is prejudicial to the euphony, the music, of 
the language. These instances have been ascertained by 
the ear ; and men have agreed to withhold to from them. 
They occur where bid, dare, feel, have, help, need, hear, 
let, make, or see is found in that part of the mono to 
which the demi-mono belongs ; as, 

[I saw him , write this letter.] 
That is, to write, &c. 

Hence, if the mono to which the demi-mono belongs, 
has bid, dare, feel, have, help, hear, let, make, or see, to is 
not expressed, but understood, in the demi-mono ; as, 

I saw him, in 1836, in the city of Boston , embark 
for England. 

What prevents the giving of a command in the word, 
embark ? It is to. For, without to, the pleocorm would 
have two cordictions — 

[I saw him, embark thou.] 

To prevent this double cordiction in the same mono, 
men have agreed to carry to in the mind only. And they 
have agreed to carry it in the mind, and not in the demi- 
mono, because the putting of it into the demi-mono offends 
the ear. 

For. 
(See page 153.) 

In. With. 
In is omitted where taught is used instead of instructed ; 



LEIPOLOGY. 165 

as, he was taught , grammar. That is, he 

was instructed in grammar. 

1. With is omitted where handed is used instead of 
served ; as, he was handed , a drink. That is, he 
was served with a drink. 

2. With is omitted where willed is used, instead of 'pre- 
sented ; as, he was luilled , a house and lot. 
That is, he was presented with a house, and lot. 

3. With is omitted where give is used in the sense of 
presented, favored, or rewarded ; as, " he was given 

, a hundred pounds for his land" — " he was given 
, an apple" — 
That is, " He was presented with a hundred pounds 
for his land." " He was presented with an apple." 

4. When the name of the act is denoted in a corm 
form, with is understood in the nepoeclad which is found- 
ed on this corm ; as, 

2. " Let me die ( , the death) of the righteous." 

2. " They dream ( , strange dreams.'") 

3. " They ran ( , a race.") 

4. " Men should live ( , pious lives") 

REMARKS. 

The nepoeclads which are presented here, have given 
teachers and grammar-makers, as much trouble as have 
those in the preceding instances, in which into is the noe- 
ton. That a mere glance will enable any one to see that 
with is the legitimate noeton in the above cases, admits of 
little doubt. The subject must be examined with care. 

Does anything accompany him who dies ? Yes. 
What is it ? Death. Can any creature die without a 
death ? No. Death, then, must accompany every crea- 
ture that dies. What word in our language is distin- 
guished for its use before appendages, concomitants, &c. ? 
With. Why, then, is not with the legitimate noeton in 
the above cases ? 

1. Let me go with my bundle. 

2. Let me go out of this world tuith the death of the 
righteous. 

That is, with, join, add, bind, append, the death to me, 



166 LEIPOLOGY. 

which accompanies the righteous man when he leaves 
this world. 

3. " They dream strange dreams." 

That is, they dream with, add, append, bind, strange 
dreams to these dreamers. A man may dream without a 
strange dream ; and he may dream ivith a strange dream. 
That is, a strange dream may not be the appendage, ac- 
companiment, of the dreaming process : and again, a 
strange dream may be the appendage, the accompaniment, 
of this process. 

Said one who could never recollect his dreams, " I 
dream without dreams." 

4. " They ran a race" 

They ran. Now says the writer to the reader, with a 
race to them, as a natural appendage of this process. 

5. [" Men should live] (with pious lives.") 

The nepoeclad contains the things to be appended, and 
the sign which indicates that this appendage is to be withed, 
bound, to something in the pleocorm. (See Part III., 
page 33.) 

Round, and About. 

In general, when round and about come together, the 
nepoeclad s which they give, are quite implenary, and are 
sustained by poeclads understood ; as, 

1. [" They went] {round , , ) ( , ,) 
(about the camp.") 

2. ["And there went out a fame] (of him) (through all 
the region) ( , , ) (round , , ) 
( , , ) (about , .") 

(All the region) (which lay) (round the country) (that 
zvas) (about him.) 

REMARK. 

When about is conjected to the demimono, the demi- 
mono, and about together, constitute a nepoeclad ; as, 
" Paul was (about to-open-his-mouth.") (See pp. 181, 
187.) 

REMARK. 

When two monodones of the second class come togeth- 
er, the nepoeclad which is given by the first, has nothing 



LEIPOLOGY. 167 

expressed, but the monodone itself; as, "Call the dog 

{from , , ) ( , , ) {under the 
table.") 

(From the place) {which is) (under the table.) 

Of. 

1. When worth is used in the sense of value, both ne- 
poeclads should be written without of; as, 

1. [ u The hat is] ( , worth) ( , six dol- 
lars.") 

2. [" The book is] ( , worth) (thirty cents.") 

REMARK. 

" He is not worth my notice," is not English. In all 
similar constructions in which moral worth is the leading 
idea, worthy should be used. 

2. When value is used, of should be expressed in both 
nepoeclads ; as, [" The hat is] {of the value) {of six dol- 
lars.") 

1. [" James was told] ( , the truth") 

2. [" Samuel was asked] ( , a question.") 

In deciding upon the true noeton of an ellipsis, the 
exact sense is the standard by which to judge : 

"John was asked ( , a question.") 

From a partial examination, one would be inclined to 
the opinion that " to answer" is the legitimate noeton of 
this ellipsis. But, from a full examination, he would, in 
all probability, select with. John was not asked to answer 
a question. But he was presented tvith a question. A 
question was put to him — presented to him; hence he 
was furnished with it. 

That the expression of with mars the euphony of the 
sentence, is readily admitted. So, also, does the expres- 
sion of every noeton, mar the euphony of the language : 

1. He got ( , me) a book. 

2. He got {for me) a book. 

1. John got what , ] ( , , ) ( , 
he wanted.) 

2. [John got what thing] {it was) {which he wanted.) 

1. [Let , him , go.] 

2. Let thou him to go. 



168 LEIPOLOGY. 

" James was told ( , the truth.") 

It may be said, particularly by those who pretend that 
" the house is building" is bad English, because the house 
is not active, that "James was told the truth" is marked 
with gross impropriety. They may say that, James was 
not told — the truth was told to him. But, what does told, 
as used in this sentence, mean? Told is used in the 
sense of " informed" The problem, then, for the gram- 
marian's solution, is v whether James was informed, or 
whether the truth was informed ! James was told of the 
truth. 



LESSON XIX. 

1. Are the monos which contain imperative, and peti- 
tionative cordictions, plenary, or implenary? 

2. Must they always have one of the two cordictive 
words, expressed ? 

3. May both cordictive words be expressed in any case? 

THE TEXT. 

1. Generally, the poecorm, the nominative case, should 
be withheld from the pleocorms, and poeclads which have 
the imperative, and petitionative cordictions ; as, [Love , 

thy neighbor,] [Forgive , our sins.] 

Remark. — The poecorm is that foundation word in the 
frame-work of a mono, which forms the gnomaclaie, or 
verb, into the sentence ; as, Love thou thy enemy, Forgive 
thou our sins. 

"Enemy," and sins are the ?zepoecorms. (See Part II.) 

2. Monos of the imperative, and petitionative, cordiction, 
must always have the gnomaclades expressed. Generally, 
the poecorm should be omitted. 



LESSON XX. 

1. What is said of those monos which contain mine, 
thine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs, whose, what f what- 
ever, and whatsoever? 



LEIPOLOGY. 169 



THE TEXT. 



These words may fall into every kind of mono : but the 
pleocorms, poeclads, and nepoeclads, in which they are found 
are almost always implenary. This is not so generally the 
case with the monos in which its and his are used. The 
above words are clades, mere branches, and must have 
some trunk, some corm expressed, or understood, on which 
to place a frame-work dependence. These words, how- 
ever, are among that class of clades, which can give their 
full import to the reader, without any expressed corm on 
which to depend for their frame-work support. The fol- 
lowing are others of this class : 

neither, either, all, such, former, first, latter, tittle, 
some, much, more, any, this, these, that, those, few, many, 
one, two, three, oldest, ivhich, both, &c. These frequently 
come by ellipsis, before of; as, I saw many of the men. 

That is, many men of the men ; or many individuals 
of the men. 

I have no excuse but that of sickness. 

That is, but that excuse of sickness. That, here, is used 
to avoid the use of " the excuse" I have no excuse but 
the excuse of sickness. 

1. "I will get your books (if you will get mine , .") 

2. " My eyes are not so good (as are thine , .") 

3. His books are newer than ours , are.") 

4. My seat is higher (than hers , is.") 

5. "Is there any tea in market which is better than 
yours , is ? ") 

6. " The gentlemen over the way have a large quantity 
of tea — but I do not know whether theirs , is better 
than ours , is." 

7. " Whose , is this , " ? 

8. " What , shall I get you ? " 

9. " Whatever , you please." 

10. [But I wish to get you ichatsoever , ] you need." 

The corms of his, and its, are generally expressed. 

11. [" Neither , (of the books,) is new."] 

12. [" But either , (of them) will answer."] 

13. [" All , , (of the company,) must attend."] 

14. [" Such , (of them) as can,) will."] 

15 



170 LEIPOLOGY. 

15. [" The former , (of these two propositions,) is 
not sound."] 

16. [The first , (of the six , ) is sound."] 

17. [The last , (of them,) however, is unsound."] 
IS. [" The latter , (of the two apples,) is ripe."] 

19. ["Give (me) a little , ] (of the pie.") 

20. [" Shall I send (you) some , ] (of the pudding ? ") 

21. [" Much , (of what , ) ( , , ) ( , , was 
said,) was not understood."] 

22. [" I will take a little more , ] (of the pudding.") 

23. [" Did any , (of the gentlemen) return?"] 

24. [Afeio , (of them) return.] 

25. ["Which , (of these two children,) is the older , ?"] 

26. ["The eldest , (of my three sons) is now here."] 

27. ["Are both , (of your daughters) well?"] 

REMARK. 

Which is generally a corm ; it is not a corm, however, 
where it stands conjected to a corm either expressed, or 
understood ; as, 

1. "Which man shall I call? " 

2. " Which of these books will you have ? " 

3. They were in " considerable doubt as to which , 
was the true Missouri." 

In the following, which is a corm : 

" There was a bifurcation which threw them into con- 
siderable doubt," &c. 



LESSON XXI. 

Who, Which, What, No, Not, Well, Surely, &c. 

These may be the only expressed words in a particular 
kind of pleocorms : 

1. " There is a lady at the door." [WJw , ?] 

2. Give me that one. [Which , , , , ?] 

3. Will you call on me this evening? [What , 

5 ? J -J 

4. Has the John Adams arrived ? , , No 
, ] [ , , Not , ?] 



LEIPOLOGY. 171 

5. " I came to Boston, where I found my two brothers 
who, I presumed, had been dead for several years." , 

, , zoell,] and what then ? 

6. " Does it rain ? " [Surely , , 

The, and of on, through, and during, as noetons. 

of. 

When the is omitted in the superior mono, before the 
derivative corms which have the ing termination, of is 
withheld from the inferior mono ; as, ' 

1. (In , writing) ( , letters) [I learn to 
compose.] 

2. " He is impatient (at , having) ( , 
nothing) to do." 

Remark. — Of is also a noeton in the inferior mono 
when his, or a similar clade, is expressed in the superior ; 
as, "His making- ( , a will) is important to us all." 

1 l 2 

" [I remember well, his (one day,) telling] me ( , 

2 

that) his friend had been to Europe." 

When the nepoeclad, founded upon corms ending with 
self, and selves, and is introduced by of to shew that the 
person mentioned, acts not by proxy, but in his own proper 
person, breaks its superior mono, of should be omitted; as, 

1. ["John( , himself ) went."] 

2. [" God ( , himself ) is the author] (of this 
universe.") 

3. (" With which) (the apostles ( , themselves) 
were endowed.") 

REMARKS. 

" John himself wrote this letter." 

A person may be the author of a thing, in his ow?i 
proper person ; and he may be the author of it in the 
person of another, or by proxy. When John himself acts, 
he acts in propria persona, in his own proper person. 
But if John acts in the person of another, he acts by 
proxy. In some instances it becomes necessary to ex- 
press in direct terms, that the agent acted in his own 
proper person — hence a mono is often added indicative of 
this idea ; as, u John himself is the writer of the note." 



172 LEIPOLOGY. 

This mono is generally implenary except where it has 
a post place ; as 

John ( , himself) went, John went {of himself .) 

"As the branch cannot bear fruit (of itself.") 

That is, the branch cannot be the author of fruit in 

propria persona, in its own proper self for it must receive 

aid from the trunk. 

God is the author of the universe (of himself.) 

God - - . - - - ( , himself) is 

the author of the universe. 
I ( , myself,) 

was there, 
I was there - - - - (of myself.) 
John - - - - -( \ himself) 

was at court. 
John was at court - - - (of himself.) 

How, in what way — was he there in propria persona ; 
or was he there by proxy ? 

In the English Syntascope, page 58, I have attempted 
to show that the corms, himself themselves &c, are not 
used for emphasis, as the old school syntaxists teach. 
Under the same page, I have also attempted to show that 
these corms are not in the nominative case, that they are 
not ^o-e-corms, but ?ze-po-e-corms. 

1. Where the nepoeclad, founded on the subject which 
is changed from one state to another, breaks the superior 
mono, of should be omitted ; as, 

1. [" They made ( , him) a good boy."] 

2. [" They have made ( , him) their Presi- 
dent."] 

3. [" Her teachers have made ( , her) a good 
scholar."] 

2. Where the nepoeclad founded on the subject w r hich 
is changed from one state to another, does not break the 
superior mono, of should be expressed ; as, 

1. [They made a good boy] {of him.) 

2. [" We have made good horses] {of them.") 

3. [" The people have made a President] {of him.") 



LEIPOLOGY 



On, and through. 



173 



1. On, and through are often noetons in nepoeclads 
which are founded upon time, and space ; as, " He arrived 
( , last Monday.") " But, now I go ( , 
my way) to him that sent me." " Nine times ( , 

the space) that measures day and night to mortal man." 

During. 

1. During is often a noeton of a nepoeclad wdiich is 
founded on time ; as, " Henry has travelled ( , 

six days) on foot." 

By. 

1. When the nepoeclad which is introduced to measure 
the exact amount of the overplus, breaks the superior mo- 
no, by should be omitted ; as, 

1. [The tea is ( , six pounds) too heavy.] 

2. ["James gave ( , a thousand dollars) too 
much."] 

2. When the nepoeclad which is introduced to measure 
the overplus, does not break the superior mono, by should 
be expressed ; as, 

1. [" The tea is too heavy] (by six pounds.") 

2. ["James gave too much] (by a thousand dollars.") 

Into. 

1. In some instances where the nepoeclad is founded on 
the thing made, or to be made, into is understood; as, 
" Command that these stones be made ( , bread.") 

2. In many instances where the generic gnomaclade, or 
verb, is involved in the specific one, the monodone which 
would be expressed, was the generic gnomaclade used, is 
understood ; as, 

I. " Thomas struts ( , a soldier.") 

The generic gnomaclade is, turns, or converts, and is 

involved in struts, the specific one. Struts, here, does 

not mean the mere act of strutting, as in " John struts 

about the room." 

In the following, struts conveys the idea of turning, or 

converting into : 

" Thomas struts a soldier." 

That is, he turns, or converts himself into a soldier by 
strutting. Thomas struts into a soldier. 
15* 



174 LEIPOLOGY. 

In general, where the gnomaclade, or verb, is indicative 
of the act, and the means, as in the above case, into is 
actually expressed ; as, 

1. "He puffed his friend into a great man." 

2. " This teacher has lectured his bad boys into good 
pupils." 

3. "He laughed his friend into a mad man." 

4. " The iron entered his soul — his bitter thoughts 
lashed him into a mad man." — Re. on G. Canning. 

5. "A thousand pangs that lash me into madness." — Jeph- 
tha's reflections on his rash vow to sacrifice his daughter. 

1. "He puffed his friend into a great man." 

That is, he turned, or converted, his friend from a small 
man, into a great one, by puffing him. 

2. " This teacher has lectured his bad boys into good 
pupils." 

That is, he has converted his bad boys into good boys, 
by lecturing them out of their bad habits. 

3. " He laughed his friend into a mad man." 

That is, he turned his friend from a serene man, into a 
mad man, by laughing at him. 

" They laughed him to scorn.' 
Laughed, here, includes the act, and the means. 

II. " Henry was crowned ( , a king.") 

III. " The people have crowned him ( , a king.") 

1. That is, Henry was turned, converted, from a mere 
man, into a king by crowning him. He was, therefore, 
croioned into a king*. 

2. That is, the people converted, turned him from a 
mere citizen man, into a king, by croivning him. The 
people, then, crowned him into a king. 

IV. " Washington was elected ( , President.") 
V. " The people elected Washington ( , Pre- 
sident.") 

1. That is, Washington was turned, converted, from 
commander of the army, into a President, by electing him 
to this office. 

2, That is, the people turned, converted, Washington 



LEIPOLOGY. 175 

from a military officer, into a President, by electing him to 
this station. They elected him, then, into a President. 

VI. " Where is he that is born ( , king) of the 
Jews?" 

VII. I constitute James ( , my agent.") 

1. The birth of Christ was the last act which was ab- 
solutely necessary to convert him into a king of the Jews. 
His birth, then, was the very act which crowned him 
king. His birth, therefore, croioned him into a king of the 
Jews. 

2. That is, I elect James my agent : I take him from 
all others by whom I am surrounded, and convert, turn, 
him into my agent by electing him to the station for which 
I want him. 

To, or into. 

Where becomes is used in the sense of " groios to," or 
" grows into," or " turns to" or " turns into" to or into 
is withheld from the nepoeclad which is founded on the 
thing into which the subject grows, or turns ; as, 

1. A calf becomes ( , an ox.) 

2* A child becomes ( , a man.) 

3. John has become ( , a Christian.) 

4. The water became ( , ice.) 



LESSON XXII. 



Entire monos are often noetons. 



I. The pleocorm 
may be a noeton where as-to is used as one part of 
speech ; as, 

[** , , , , , ] (As-to the works of my 
predecessors, the shortness of the time since their com- 
mencement, and the difficulties attending philological 
investigation, forbid the belief that they have attained 
that degree of excellence to which English syntax may 
be carried. [It may be observed.] 



176 LEIPOLOGY. 

II. The poeclad 
is often a noeton where some word in the inferior mono, 
is omitted, and which cannot be supplied without the in- 
troduction of an entire poeclad ; as, 

1. " Henry purchased what , ]( , , ) 
( , he wanted.") 

2. [" Give (me) what , ] ( , , ) ( 
I want ;) (and I will return.") 

3. [What ,(,,)(,,, 
to do,) we could not tell."] 

The entire poeclad : " it was." 

REMARKS. 

It is the common practice to exchange what for that which. But 
surely none will say that this exchange is a solution of the word ! That 
and which take the place oiwhat. These words are parsed, and what 
is thrown out ! Now, if the parsing of that, and which can be con- 
sidered a parsing of what, the parsing of a word is something en- 
tirely different from anything of which I have had a conception. 
Let us take the true method, which, I believe, is the following : 

He got what he wanted. 

That is, He got what thing it was which he wanted. The word, 
what, is a metaclade, an adjective, belonging to thing, understood. 

The calling of words compound relatives, and then throwing 
them from the sentence, is certainly a queer way of parsing them ! 

" But they understood not what he spake unto them." 

Here the old school grammarians call what a compound relative, and 
reject it for that and which. The translator, however, has rendered 
this sentence full ; and, in doing so, he has demonstrated that what 
is not a proxy corm of any kind, but a mere metaclade. 

"But they understood not (what things') (they were,) (which he 
spake) (unto them.") 

The poeclad 
is often a noeton to sustain an inferior mono ; as, 

1. ("By grace) ( , , a ) [are ye saved] 
(^through faith.") 

[Ye are saved] (by grace) ( , , ) (through faith.) 
Conjective Reading: — {which cometh) (through faith.) 

2. [I saw a pin] ( , , a) (a on the floor.) 

3. ["A tap ( , , , a) (a on Ms shoulder) 
drew his attention] (from me.") 

4. [" Do you know a man] ( , , «) ( a by the 
name) (of James.") ivho goes 



LEIPOLOGY. 177 

I. II. Nepoeclads 
are often noetons where the specific mono implies the 
generic; as, 

1. [" The boy was called ( , , , ) ( 
John.") 

2. [" The army is ( , , , ) ( 
ten thousand men) strong."] 

3. [I have some recollection] (of his father's being) 
( ) ( i a judge.) 

4. [" The wall is ( , , , ) ( , six 
feet) high."] 

5. [" The board is ( , , , ) ( , an 
inch) thick."] 

6. [" This boy is ( , , , ) ( , ten 
years) old."] 

7. [" He counted his army] ( , , , ) 
( , man) (by man.") 

8. [Henry rode] ( , , , )( , day) 
(after day.) 

9. ["they stood] ( , , ) ( 
one , ) (by another , .") 

10. [" The children were arranged] ( , , , ) 
( , one , ) (after another , .") 

11. [« They went] ( , , , ) ( 
one , ) (after another , .") 

12. " They marched ( ,,,)(, 
two , ) (by two , .") 

13. " John fell] ( , , , ) ( , neck) 
(and , , ) ( , , , ) ( , heels.") 

14. The tea weighs (,,,)(, six pounds.) 

I. The specific monos. 
(John,) ( , ten thousand men,) ( , judge,) 

( , six feet,) ( , an inch.) ( , ten 

years,) ( , man) (by man,) ( , day) (after 

day,) ( , one , ) (after another , ,) 

( , two , ) (by two , ,) ( 

neck,) ( , heels.) [Part III., page 22.] 

II. The generic monos. 
(by the name,) (to the amount,) (in the office,) (in the 
order,) 



178 MONOLOGY. 



LESSON XXIII. 

1. When should a poeclad be added ? 

2. Have you examined with great care, all the instances 
which illustrate the second rule in this lesson ? 

3. What is the first rule ? 

4. Can you give any of the illustrations under these 
rules ? 

5. What are the noetons which are employed in giving 
an additional poeclad ? 

THE TEXT. 

RULES 

For adding poeclads hy such noetons as " who am," " who 
was" " tvho has" " who will," " tvho ivill be," " which is" 
" that is" " that were" " which are" " as was" " £^<3tf 
Aaof," " and Iivas," " arad Ae w," " #?zd £Aey are," " J," 
"thou," "he," "they," "who," &c, &c. 

Rule I. 
Where another cordiction is in exact harmony with the 
true construction of the sentence, a poeclad should be 
added; as, 

1. [" There was a man] ( , , sent) (from 
God. 5 ') 

2. [" He was there] ( , , , sick,) (and 
, , friendless.") 

3. [" Those , ( , going) (before,) tar- 
ried] (for us,) (at Troas.") 

The noeton is, who, or they — who going, or they going. 

The principle is this : 

Every additional cordiction is a new mono, whether 
that cordiction is expressed, or implied. 

4. (" He being wise) [we gave heed] (to his advice.") 
"He being wise" is as much an affirmations is "we 

gave heed," or as is " He ivas ivise" 

5. [" I found John , ] ( , , reading 
his book.") 

[I found John when] (he was reading his book.) 

It would not comport with the sense to say 






MONOLOGY. 179 

I found John who was reading his book. 

6. [" John had his horse shot] (under him.")^ 

It would pervert the sense to make an additional mono : 
[John had his horse] (which was shot) (under him.) 

7. [" James had his arm shot off."] 

8. [Nathaniel had a horse stolen.) 
A poeclad would change the sense : 
[Nathaniel had a horse] (which was stolen.) 

He had possession of a horse which was stolen, is not 
the idea : he had a horse stolen. 

9. [A party (of the Seneca Indians,) came to war] 
(against the Kataubas,) ( , , bitter enemies) (to 
each-other.) 

Each, and other must be taken together as a corm. 

Rule II. 
When there is no additional cordiction in the sense, all 
the words must be included in one mono ; as, 

1. [" I found him sick."] 

2. [« We found them friendly."] 

3. [" He was found dead."] 

The introduction of a poeclad, would pervert the true 
idea : j» - 

1. I found him who was dead. 

2. We found them who were friendly. 

REMARKS. 

"When and occurs between two monos of address, it does not be- 
long to either mono of address, but to a poeclad, modelled after the 
pleocorm, or after that poeclad to which the mono of address is con- 
nected ; as, 

(" Men,) (brethren,) (and) (fathers,) [hearken , 
[Hearken ye,] men ;) (and hearken ye,) (brethren;) (and 
hearken ye,) (fathers.) 

The first poeclad is all understood. 

* "His horse shot," is the nepoecorm of had. (See page 181.) 



180 MONOLOGY. 

LESSON XXIV. 

Whoever, Whosoever, Though, and Although. 

1. Whoever rarely, if ever, is found far pleocorms. 

Whoever would learn grammar as it is, must study it 
as it is. 

(Whoever would learn grammar) (as it is) [he must 
study it] (as it is.) 

2. (" Whosoever believeth) [ , shall be saved."] 

3. Who, which, that, as, whom, and whomsoever, are 
rarely, if ever, found in pleocorms. 

REMARKS. 

Who and whom may be found in the interrogative pleo- 
corm ; as, Who is he ? Whom did you call ? 

2. Which, and that may be in a pleocorm when they 
are mere clades ; as, Which man came ? That book is 
mine. 

Though. 

Though rarely, if ever, gives a 'pleocorm, except where 
yet introduces a poeclad ; as, [ Though he was rich ;] (yet 
he became poor) (for our sakes.) 

(Though he was rich,) [he became poor] (for our sakes.) 

[He became poor] (for our sakes) (though he was rich.) 

Thus it is seen what an influence a little word may produce in 
reducing the rank of a mono. 

REMARKS. 

There are many sentences, which, to an old school grammarian, 
appear to be good English, that are so incorrect that they cannot 
be monoized. Among them are the following : 

1. " He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." 

2. " He that formed the ear, can he not hear? " 

3. "A little while, and ye shall not see me ; and again a little 
while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father." 

1. He in the first, and in the second, should be him. 

2. Both himSf however, should be rejected els pleonasms. 

1. [Let , him (that hath ears to hear , ) , hear , ?] 

2. [Can he (that formed the ear,) not hear , ?] 

3. [After (a little while shall have passed) ye shall not see me J 
and again I say) {after (a little while shall have passed) ye shall 
see me,) (because I shall go) (to the Father.) 



MONOLOGY. 181 

[After (a little while , , , ) ye shall not see me ;] 
( , again , , ) (after (a little while , , , ) ye 
shall see me,) because I , go) (to the Father.) 

The following are bad : 

1. " Conduct in such a way as that you will secure the friendship 
of all." 

Conduct yourself in such a way as will secure to you the friend- 
ship of all. 

2. " He called " for the purpose " that he might see his old friends 
again." 

Omit, " for the purpose " 

As should not come before that, where that stands before a mono 
denoting a, purpose, an object to be accomplished. 



LESSON XXV . 

1. When does an entire mono become a corm ? 

2. When does one entire mono make a mere part of 
another mono ? 

3. When does the demimono become a corm ? 

THE TEXT. 

"At length," " at large,"' "at least," "by all means," " in fine," 
"in short," "at all," &c, are all distinct monos. 

Have you hurt yourself? [ , , Not , , ] (at all.) 

1. When one, or more monos, bear a corm relation to 
a clade in another mono, the mono, or monos, become a 
corm of the other mono ; as, 

[He said " ihey'ivill-reverence-my-son"] 

He said what? "they will reverence my son" This 
mono, then, is taken as one thing, as one long word, as 
the nepoecorm of said. 

The Demimono. 

2. When the demimono bears a corm relation to a 
clade, the demimono is, in relation to the clade, a corm : 
as, 

1. [" What went ye out] (for to-see.") 
[To-see-our-friends is pleasing.] 

Here, " to see" is the corm of the clade, for. And, "To 
see our friends," is the corm of the clades, is, and. pleasing. 
(English Syntascope, p. 203.) 

16 



182 EPE DENDROLOGY. 

SPECIMEN. 

[He said (where -art- thou ?)] 

A plenary unbroken pleocorm. 

" Where art thou." 

A plenary unbroken poeclad, the nepoecorm of said, 
uni relation, belonging to the first part of the pleocorm. 
Conjective Heading : [He said] (where art thou.) 

EXERCISES. 

1. [He said where art thou ?] 

" where art thou ? " 

2. [He said they will reverence my son.] 

" they will reverence my son." 

3. [His disciples asked (of him) who did sin ?] 

" ivho did sin ?" 

4. [Jesus saith (to Simon Peter) lovest thou me ? 

" lovest thou me ? " 

5. [And Peter said Lord, thou hiowest all things.] 

(" Lord) (thou knoivest all things") 

6. [But now ye seek to kill me.] 

(to kill me.) 

7. [" They said Abraham is our father.] 

(Abraham is our father.) 

8. [Jesus said if ye were Abraham's children, ye would 
do the works of Abraham.] 

(" If ye ioere Abraham's children,) (ye would do the 
works) (of Abraham") 







LESSON XXVI 

EP-E-DENDROLOGY. 

1. What is a corm? 

2. What is a clade ? 

3. What is ep-e-dendrology ? 

4. How many ranks have clades ? 

5. Have clades relations ? 

6. What is the uni relation? 

7. What is the rank of a clade ? 

8. What is the relation of a clade ? 

9. What does epe mean ? 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 183 

THE TEXT. 

Ep-e-den-drology is the second part of dendrology, and 
respects the trunks and branch relations of the words of a 
mono. Ep-e, from epos — woj'd. (See p. 64.) 

Division of words under ep~e-den-drology. 
1. The words of a mono are divided under epedendrol- 
ogy into corms, and clades. 

1. Corm, from korrnos, trunk, basis, foundation. 

2. Clade, from klados, branch, dependent part, an un- 
foundational word. 

I. CORM. 

The conn, or ?wun is a foundation word in the frame- 
work of a mono ; as, [He went] (unto the mount) (of Olives.) 

Remark. — "What the trunk is to it? branches in the frame-work of 
a tree, the corm, or noun is to the clades in the frame-work of a 
mono. 

II. CLADE. 

The clade is a word which has a branch dependence 
upoa another word; as, [He then went] (unto the mount) 
(of Olives.) 

Remark. — What the branches are to the trunk, in the frame-work 
of a tree, the clades are to the corm -in the frame-work of a mono. 
As some branches hold a direct relation to the trunk, so some clades 
hold a direct relation to the corm ; as, [He then went] (unto the 
mount) (of Olives.) 

And as some branches hold an indirect, or remote relation to 
the trunk, but a direct, or close one to another branch, so some 
clades hold an indirect, or remote connection to the corm, but a 
direct, or close one to another clade ; as, He then went. 

RANK, AND RELATION OF CLADES. 

The rank of a clade respects its near, or remote re- 
lation to the corm. There are six ranks. They are 
marked in the prepared exercises, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 

I. ILLUSTRATION. 
1 

Cold weather. 
2 1 

Too cold weather. 
3 2 1 
Much too cold weather. 
4 3 2 1 
Very much too cold weather. 



184 EPEDENDROLOGY. 

II. ILLUSTRATION. 

1 

cold weather, A clade of the first rank, belonging 
to weather. 
2.1 1 

too cold weather, A clade, two constructive degrees 
from weather, and one from cold. 
3.2.1 2.1 1 

much too cold weather, A clade, three constructive degrees 

from weather, two from cold, and 
one from too. 

4.3.2.1 3.2.1 2.1 1 

very much too cold weather, A clade, four constructive degrees 

from weather, three from cold, two 
from too, and one from much. 

5.4.3.2.1. 4.3.2.1. 3.2.1. 2.1. 1 

this boy's mother's father's brother's son, A clade, five construc- 

tive degrees from son, 
four from brother's, three 
from father's, two from 
mother's, and one from 
boy's. 

2. The relations of a clade respect the number of words 
to which the clade belongs. There are two relations, viz., 
Uni, and Plus. 

1. The uni relation respects one frame- work connection 
which a clade holds with another word ; as, cold water. 

2. The plus relation respects a plural frame-work con- 
nection which a clade holds with corms ; as, He drank 
water. 

RULES. 

1. Every clade of the first rank must be conjected to 
the corm, or corms which sustain it in the frame-work 
of the mono. 

2. Every clade of the second rank must be conjected to 
the clade of the first, which sustains it in the frame-work 
of the mono. 

3. Every clade of the third rank, must be conjected to 
the clade of the second, which sustains it in the frame- 
work of the mono. 

4. Every clade of the fourth rank, must be conjected 
to the clade of the third, which sustains it in the frame- 
work of the mono. 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 185 

5. Every clade of the fifth rank must be conjected to 
the clade of the fourth, which sustains it in the frame- 
work of the mono. 

7. Every clade belonging to a mono, is of the first rank, 
uni relation ; and it must be conjected to the mono which 
sustains it in the frame-work of the gnomod ; as, he went, 
because (he was called.) 

Remarks. — This principle applies to those monoclones 
only, which give pleocorms, and poeclads. The mono- 
dones which give nepoeclads, stand conjected, not to the 
whole mono, but to the conn only, of the mono. 

Every clade which belongs to a whole mono, is of the 
first rank, because the entire mono in relation to this one 
clade, is a corm. And every clade which belongs to a 
whole mono, is of the uni relation, because the mono to 
which the clade belongs, is but one corm : 

" Henry went because (he was called.") 

" He ivas called" is the corm of because. This mono is 
but one corm — hence because is of the uni relation. (See 
p. 56.) 

1. The ranks are denoted by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 

2. The uni relation by the erect posture of the fig- 
ure : 2, 1. 

3. The plus relation, by the horizontal posture : ro >— 

4. In this Lesson the clades only, have figures : 1, 2, 3. 

SPECIMEN. 

1 14 3 2 1 

1. [The fire is very much too hot.] 

The, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to fire. Connective 
Reading : the fire. Rule i. 

fire, a corm. 

is, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to fire. Conjectivc 
Reading : fire is. Rule 1. 

very, a clade, fourth rank, uni relation, belonging to much. Con- 
nective Reading : very much. Rule 4. 

much, a clade, third rank, uni relation, belonging to too. Conjectivc 
Reading : much too. Rule 3. 

too, a clade, second rank, uni relation, belonging to hot. Conjec- 
tive Reading : too hot. Rule 2. 

hot, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to fire. Conjective 
Reading : hot fire. Rule 1. 

16* 



186 EPEDENDROLOGY. 

1 1 

8. [" And his disciples said ' Who-then-can-be-saved V "] 

And, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to its own mono. 

Conjective Heading : A.nd his-disciples-said-who-then-can-be- 

saved. Rule 7. 
his, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to disciples, 

Conjective Reading : his disciples. Rule 1. 
disciples, a corm. 
said, a clade, first rank, plus relation, belonging to disciples, and 

the cormified mono, who-then-can-be-saved. Conjective 

Reading : disciples said who-then-can-be-saved. Rule 1. 
who-then-can-be-saved, a corm. (See page 181.) 

1111 
(Who then can be saved ?) 

Who, a corm. 

then, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to its own mono. 
Conjective Reading : then who-can-be-saved. Rule 7. 
(See then, page 107.) 

can, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to who. Con- 

jective Reading : who can. Rule 1. 

be, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to who. Conjec- 

tive Reading: who be. Rule 1. 

saved, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to who Conjec- 
tive Reading : saved who. Rule 1. 

REMARKS. 

In giving the conjective reading, no attention need be 
paid to the euphony of the words. The only object in 
conjecting the inferior words to their respective superiors, 
is to demonstrate their frame-work dependence ; hence, if 
the process does mar the euphony, it can produce no bad 
result : this will enable the pupil to decide the connection 
of words by the judgment instead of by the ear. 

John is writing letters- 

Conjective Reading of writing ; John writing letters, 
1 1 2 2 ^ 

3, [" What , went ye out to see ? "] 

What, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to thing under- 
stood. Conjective Reading : what thing. Rule 1. 

thing, understood, a corm. 

went, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to ye. Conjec- 
tive Reading: ye went. Rule 1. 

ye, a corm. 

out, a clade, second rank, uni relation, belonging to went. 

Conjective Reading : went out. Rule 2. 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 187 

to, a clade, second rank, uni relation, belonging to see. Con- 

nective Reading : to see. Rule 2. (See pp. 52, 53.) 

see, a clade, first rank, plus relation, belonging to ye, and 

thing. Conjective Reading : thing ye see, or ye see thing. 
Rule 1, (page 52.) 

1 2 1 

(What thing [went ye out] for to-see.) 
{For to-see-whaWAmg') [went ye out?] 

For, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to the cormified 

demimono, to-see-what-thing. Conjective Reading : for to- 
see-what-thing. Rale 7, (page 181.) 

to-see-what-thing, a corm. 

m 2 f u 11 

4. [" It is well known that] (man is mortal.") 

It, a corm. 

is, a clade, first rank, plus relation, belonging to it, and that. 

Conjective Reading: it is that. Rule 1. 

well, a clade, second rank, uni relation, belonging to known. 
Conjective Reading : well known. Rule 2. 

known, a clade, first rank, plus relation, belonging to it, and that. 
Conjective Reading : it known that. Rule 1.* 

that, a corm. 

man is mortal. 

man, a corm. 

is, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to man. Conjec- 

tive Reading: man is. Rule 1. 

mortal, a clade, first rank, uni relation, belonging to man. 
Conjective Reading : mortal man. Rule 1. 

PREPARED EXERCISES, 
2 1 

Coal black cloth. 

2 1 

Strikingly green trees. 

1 13 2 1 

This fact is very well knpwn. 

2 1 

Grayish blue cloth. 

Ill 111 

Those, fine, beautiful, young, green, straight trees. 

4 3 2 1 

How very fast James walks. 

* It and that are the known things. 



188 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 



13 2 1 

I am most completely disappointed. 

4 3 2 1 
Very much too cold weather. 

1 " 14 3 2 1 

The weather is very much too warm. 

r 1 2 1 

He is a very learned man. 

1^11 
John will be a good scholar. 

1 1 

Cold, dark nights. 

2 1 * 

Marble ware house. 

2 1 

Cloud capt towers. 

1 1 1 

[The tea is ( , 

1 1 

[Tom struts] ( , 

1 1 

[Henry was crowned] ( 



1 1 



1 2 1 

six pounds) too heavy.] P. 173. 
1 

a soldier.) P. 173. 
1 

a king.) P. 173. 
1 

a scholar.) P. 175. 
1 1 



ten pounds.) P. 177. 
1 2 1 

, ten thousand men) 



[Joseph became] ( 

1 
[The tea weighs] (,,,)( 

1 111 

[The army is ( , , , ) ( 
1 
strong.] P. 177. 

1 14 3 2 1 

The distance is very much too long. 
12 ^ 
They can not write letters. 

Every clade of the second rank must belong to one of 
the first ; hence, where there are two of the first, the 
sense must decide to which of the two the clade of the 
second, belongs. In the above example, there are two of 
the first — can, and write. And the question is, to which 
of these two, not belongs. It is the province of not to 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 189 

deny the power, or ability to do the act of writing. And 
to lead the mind to this sense of the expression, not has 
a figure over it corresponding in size to that over can. 
Not, and never almost always belong to the clade which 
falls on the left hand. 

2 111 1 12^ 

[John then went] (for his book ;) (but^ he did not get it.) 
1 2 
I have not written letters. 

12^1 
He would not learn his lesson. 

1 
He planted a vineyard. 

mjX 12^ 

[He is a lad] (whom you may not know.) 

1 12^1 

Idle children will not learn their books. 

11 12 13 2 

This large book has been written long since. 

1 12 2 M l < 

These boys have not been writing their copies. 

12 1 

We have been laughing. 

12 1 
You have been walking. 

13 2 1 

We shall have been walking. 
Coal black cloth. 
Strikingly green trees. 
The fact is very well known. 
Grayish blue cloth. 

1 12 2 M 1 

These boys have not been writing their copies. 

12 1 

We have been laughing. 
1 2 1 

You have been walking. 

13 2 1 

We shall have been walking. 

* But, a clade belonging to its own mono. Rule 7. 



190 



EPEBENDROLOGY. 



The distance is very much too long. 

His father was very much pleased. 

Very much too cold weather. 

Coal black cloth. 

Strikingly green trees. 

This fact is very well known. 

Grayish blue cloth. 



Peter • 


made 


Samuel's 


shoes. 


Samuel 


cut 


Peter's 


hand. 


Lucy 


knits 


men's 


mittens. 


Sally 


makes 


ladies' 


clothes, f 


Julia 


studies 


Murray's 


works. 


Harriet 


read 


Homer's 


Iliad. 


Men 


built 


Solomon's 


temple. 



1. ["His disciples said (who-then-can-be-saved ?")] 

2. [(" Thou-shalt-love-the-Lord") is the first command- 
ment.] 

3. [The first commandment is (" Thou-shalt-love-the- 
Lord.")] 

4. [The first commandment is that] (" Thou shalt love 
the Lord.") 

5. [For- God to-do-wrong *is impossible.] 

6. [It is impossible] (for God-to-do-wrong.) 

7. [Have you read {the- Sonship-of- Jesus- Christ ?) 

The titles of books, &c, which comprise two or more words, are 
corms ; as, " Brown's Remains," "Report of Sunday Schools" "Ed- 
wards on Redemption" " Sonship of Jesus Christ." 

8. [To-f or give-out '-enemies is divine.] 

9. [It is divine] (to- f or give-our -enemies.) 

10. [I desire y to-return-now. ,] 

11. [\To-return-now } is my desire.] 

12. [Is Jo- give-tribute j (unto Caesar) lawful ?] 

13. [/wish (for x to-return-immediately.,)] 

14. (For (to-return-imm,ediately)) is (for (to-obey-his- 
orders.))] 

15. [JT wish] (for K to-obey-his-orders. f ) 

16. [/desire yto-obey-his-orders.j] 

17. [It is said that] (the President is sick.) 

18. [" Now we know that] (thou hast a devil") 



EPEDENDROLOGY. 191 

19. [Command thou that] (these stones , be made) 
( , bread.) 

20. [For I will send all my plagues] (upon thine head) 
{ , that) {they may know that) (there is none) 
( , , like) ( , me) (in the land.) 

21. [And it came ^to pass, (in those days) that] (there 
went out a decree) ( , , " that) (all the world 
should be taxed.) 

22. [It is so] (with me) ( , , , that) (I 
cannot attend.) 

23. ["And it was revealed (unto him) that] (he should 
not see death before) (he had seen the Lord's Christ") 

24. [" Now it came v to pass, (on a certain day) that] (he 
entered) (into a ship") 

25. [" I did it so well) ( , , , that) (he 
gave ( , me) much praise.) 

26. ( , Much) (as man desires) [a little will an- 
swer.] 

27. [It was nearly (at the moment) ( , , , ) 
( , , that) (Augustus Caesar had (for a third 
time) since (the foundation (of the city) , , , ) 
shut the temple) (of Janus) (in token) (of the prevalence) 
(of universal peace) that] (the Saviour (of the world) was 
born.) # 

2S. (0,) [ , , that] (I had the wings) (of the 
dove) ( , that) (I could soar) (above this earth) 

(of wo.) 

Ill 11 1 

[He boasts] (of , being) ( , a friend) (to 
America.) P. 171. 
'11111 11 

[I shall go] (for all ,,)(,, , 

1 1 

, ) ( i you.") 

[He was asked] ( , a question.) P. 167. 

[The hat cost] (,,,)(, five 
dollars.) P. 177. 

[The hat is] ( , , worth) ( t a dol- 

lar.) P. 167. 

For exercises in Epedendrologv, take pages 49, 59, 61, 
68, 69, 82, 91, 105, 114, 118, 127, 144, 148, 155, 159, 
169, 170, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 182, 165, 166r 



PART II. 

The English Syntax comprises three distinct parts. 
The second part only, is offered as a substitute for the 
old system. And, that the teachers who may use Part 
I., may see the simplicity and brevity of Part II., I 
give this synopsis of its leading principles. 

(The reasons for the new nomenclature, are given under page 19.) 

I. Co rms are divided into 
Poecorms, and Nepoecorms. 

1. Poe-corm, the corm which converts the gno-ma- 
clade into the sentence ; as, John resembles James. John. 

2. Nepoe-corm, the corm which does not convert the 
gnoma~c\&de into the sentence ; as, James resembles 
John. John. 

II. Clades are divided into 

Gnomaclades, and Agnomaclades. 

1. Gnoma-clade, a clade, capable of being converted into 
a gno-me, a sentence ; as, resembles, can, writes, am, is, see. 

2. Agnoma-clade, a clade, not capable of being con- 
verted into a gno-me, or sentence ; as, alike, of, high. 

III. Agnomaclades, into » 

Steroclades, Metaclades, Clonoclades, and Monoclades. 



New. Truth. Old. Error, 

1. Po-e- . . | Noun in the nominative case. 

2. Ne-po-e- i ' Noun in the objective case. 

1. Gno-m<z- ) . . . . Verb, participle. 

2. Ste-ro- I . . . . Preposition. 

3. Met-a- \ clade. Adjective, article, possessive case. 

4. Clo-no- j . . . . Ad-verb. 

5. Mon-o- j . . . . Conjunction. 

1. Stero-cldide, a clade, fixed to the nepoecorm ; as, I 
heard of him. 

2. Meta~cla.de, a clade, capable of being conjected by 
alternation, to both corms ; as, These bo}^s saw these books. 

3. Clo?w-cl'dde, a clade of a clade; as, very good 
apples. 

4. Mono-cl'ade. a clade which is conjected to an entire 
mono ; as, [" He went ;] (but he did not remain.") 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 

Dedication, 3 

Recommendations, 7 

Preface, 13 

Advertisement, 19 

The two Systems contrasted, 21 

Explanation of Terms, 23, 25 

Language, Syntax, &c, 30 

Division of Syntax, 31 

Gnomeology, 31, 34 

Sentence, gnomod, and cordiction, . . . . 37, 39 

Monology, a mono, 40, 41, 43, 45 

The words of a mono have the same relation, &c, . . 46 
Directions in monoizing, principles, and specimen, . . 49 
The demimono, and the paraclade, to, . . . . .52 
Single words conjected to entire monos, .... 56 

Yet, nevertheless, and, both, either, neither, hence, however, not- 

only, otherwise, provided, since, thence, then, now, still, for, 58, 106 

States of monos, 59 

Dendrology, Mono-dendrology, order of monos, ... 65 

Pleo-o-corm, and clad, . 66 

How the pleocorm may be distinguished, .... 67 

Ra?ik, and relations of clads, 70 

Conjective Reading, 71 

The true syntax of and, 79 

Syn-clad-ol-o-gy, division of clads, 86 

Gnomeology of clads, 89 

Monodones, 92 

As, 137, 134, 133, 95 

jtonoizing Rules, 96 

When, as, while, then, before, after, where, there, as long, and 

while, ........... 133 

But, 138, 140, 142, 100 

But, and only, 144 

Except, excepting, and than, . . . . . . .147 

Than whom, 148 

Pleology, and Leipology, 110 

A no-e-ton, Ill 

And-so, 130 

Does and, always give a new mono, 115 

As-for, 134, 136 

Even, 136 

As-well-as, . 137 

As-also 138 



CONTENTS. 

[It is said that] (James is ill,) 

[It rained so fast] ( , , , that) I remained in, 
I went (in order) ( , that) I might aid you, 
[Can you drink] (after me,) ...... 

[After (these things , , , ) Jesus walked] in Gal 

ilee,) .... - 

" He that cometh (after me,) is preferred (before me,) (for he 

was before me") 

I do not wish to promise (lest , , , that) I could 

not attend, ... 

I cannot go (provided , , that) you do not return, 
[I shall return] (notwithstanding the bad roads , ) ( 
, .) ...... 

[All went] (save John,) ... . . 

[" What , have I , to do] (with thee ? ") 
[James gave ( , Charles) a book,] 
[I saw John , write the letter,] . 
[He was taught] ( , grammar,) . 

a house,) 
, an apple,) . 
, a drink,) 
, a dollar) (for his hat,) 
the death,) . 
strange dreams,) 
a race,) 
, pious lives,) 

)( ; . 



(about 



[He was willed] ( 
[John was given] ( 
[Henry was handed] ( 
[He was offered] ( 
[Let me die] ( , 
[They dream] ( 
[They ran] ( , 
[Men should live] ( 
[They went] (round , 

the camp.) Hound, About, 
" Call the dog from under the table," 
[The hat is] ( , , worth) ( , six dollars,) 
[Samuel was asked] ( , a question,) 
(In , writing) ( , letters,) I improve 
[John ( , himself) went,] . . . 
They made ( , him) a good boy, 
[The tea is ( , six pounds) too heavy,] 
[Tom struts] ( ■ , a soldier,) . . . 
[Henry was crowned] ( , a king,) 
[A calf becomes] ( , an ox,) 
[Water becomes] ( , ice,) . 
Two words may be taken as one part of speech, 
But, in the sense of except, never gives, 
But, in the sense of different from, 
But, in the sense of except, 
Except, excepting, than, . 



For, even, 



That, 

After, before, 

Provided, lest, notwithstanding, 

Save, 

To, for, in, concerning, about, during 
Mound about, 

Of, . . . . . 

Mine, thine, ours, both, &c. 



and 



through, 



Page. 
153 
154 
155 
156 

157 

157 

159 
159 



159 
161 
162, 163 
163 
164 
164 
164 
165 
165 
165 
165 
165 
165 
165 



166 
166 
167 
167 
171 
171 
172 
173 
173 
173 
175 
175 
135 
141 
142 
142 
147 

150, 152 
153 

156, 157 
159 
161 
163 
166 

167, 171 
168 



135 
135 
136 
136 
136 
137 



CONTENTS. 

Page. 

[" There was a difficulty] (between John) , (and , , 

, , ) ( ; his brother,") .... 127 
(As , appears,) (as , follows,) . . . 134 
[We saw apples,] (and , , , , ) ( , , 

so on,) 132 

[As (John returned) he saw me.] as long, .... 133 
[ Wlien (the clock struck ten) I went,] . . . . 133, 134 
[A corm is a foundation word,] (as , , ,) ( , 

, ) ( , , , , :) there was a man, . 135 
p'And I saw (as it were) a sea] (of glass,") . 
• ( And (as touching the dead) that they rise not," 
[John has such fruit] (as , , , ) ( , I like,) 
[John said nothing] (as (I know) of,) 
[They are not (of the world) even] (as I am not,) . 

[John came] (as a prophet,) 

[The heat was so intense] (as to render travelling almost im 

possible,) ....... . 137 

" That the same might be ready (as a matter) of bounty, and 

not (as , , ) (of covetousness,") . . . 137 

[John (as also his brother , , ) was there,] . .138 
Stephen works (as well as , , plays,) . . . 138 
[It was done] (as-well, (by Nathaniel,) as , , , ) 

(by Samuel.) 
[Henry is good.] [But , , , ] (for what ?) . 140 
[He hath not grieved me] (but , , , , ) (in 

part,) ....". 142 

[Man (but , , ) (for this) were active] (to no end,) 142 
In what does true piety consist (but , , ) (in a 

hearty resignation) (to the will) (of God,) . . . 142 

" No man cometh to the Father (bat , , ) by me," 143 
Joseph has done nothing this week (but , , ) ( , 

play,) 143 

It is impossible (but that) offences will come, . . .143 

[Johnson has , , ] (but one son,) .... 143 

[John has only one son,] 144 

[James eat nothing] (but an apple.) 142 

[James makes no charge] (against Stephen) (except that) he is 

idle, 147 

[I saw Johnson daily] (than whom) (no man entertained me ■ 

better.) 148 

[It is better] ( , , , to suffer wrong) (than , 

, , ) ( , , ) (to do wrong,) . . 149 
[More persons paid , ] (than they were) (who could get 

seats.) 

[He washed] ( , seven times,) 150 

"To be sure," 151 

[What went ye out] ( , to see ?) 151 

[He told him] ( , to go,) 151 

[No man could bind him :] (no , , not , , 

even) with chains, 152 

Did you go to the city last week ? No, .... 152 

[It rains.] [I know that,] 153 



m 




m 



.■ 






no 



